Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lefty OBAMA,helping FBI coverup,starting CIA secret torture sites,hurting labor..oh yeah real lefty


Recommended Posts

  • LEFTY OBAMA ?
  • Paraguay: CIA behind the Coup
    July 4, 2012 by AnonAF

THERE is such confidence between Federico Franco, the coup President now installed in Paraguay, and the United States embassy in the country, that Franco was there discussing the overthrow of President Fernando Lugo as early as 2009. This was revealed in a Wikileaks document in which an intelligence official refers to a conversation with Franco, then the Vice Presi

.

The text, dated May 6, 2009, was composed by a member of the diplomatic mission (read CIA) and was brought to light later by Australian Julian Assange’s group. It notes the disagreement observed between the President and his Vice President and makes the latter’s intentions clear.

The secret report indicated that differences between Lugo and Franco were escalating, but that Franco had told the ambassador, on April 28, that he was not involved in any plan to overthrow Lugo. Franco further stated that his position was one of patience, supporting democratic institutions in Paraguay.

Federico Franco belongs to the right-wing Liberal Radical Authentic Party, the soft opposition permitted by the dictator Alfredo Stroessner, who subjected Paraguay to a bloody regime for 35 years. The coming to power of this liberal right-wing doctor, alongside the former bishop Fernando Lugo was the result of political machinations which are best understood by the traditional ruling class in this South American country.

The friendly relationship which Franco enjoyed with the U.S. embassy in Asunción demonstrates the close ties between imperialist diplomats and the Vice President, who did not hide his contempt for the “priest” whose administration he was part of.

Evidently to the yankees’ delight, he discussed and regularly shared his numerous arguments with Lugo, which emerged on almost a daily basis.

When Franco assumed the Vice Presidency, the U.S. State Department had already assigned to the embassy a figure with the necessary experience to confront an undesirable situation. The ambassador was James Cason, who had gained notoriety as the head of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, the CIA station that passes for a diplomatic mission in the Cuban capital.

In Asunción, Cason thought of himself as entertaining, singing folk songs in Guaraní, but did not limit himself to such pastimes. The associate of the Cuban- American mafia took pains to provoke a record number of confrontational incidents with authorities.

The current ambassador in Asunción, Liliana Ayalde, arrived to take Franco under her wing and assure his integration into plans being made by Stroessner’s followers who control the nation’s parliamentary system, and have been conspiring against President Lugo.

AN ILLUSTRATIVE INCIDENT

In March of 2010, Paraguay’s Minister of Defense, retired General Luis Bareiro Spaini was called to appear before the Chamber of Deputies as a result of his “affronts to the U.S. ambassador.”

With 41 votes in favor and four against, deputies approved a reprimand of the high ranking official for a letter he had sent to Ayalde, accusing her of intervening in Paraguay’s internal affairs.

This happened during a luncheon organized at the embassy with Vice President Federico Franco and a group of visiting U.S. army generals in attendance, when Ayalde proposed a debate at the table about the political situation in Paraguay and the possibility of impeaching President Lugo!

The Congressional opposition did not reprimand Franco, but rather General Bareiro Spaini, for “involving himself inappropriately in affairs handled by the Ministry of Foreign Relations,” while Franco’s treasonous position was not even mentioned.

The plot was already in the works.

LUGO SURROUNDED BY SHARKS

The 2010 document revealed that speculation was already underway concerning plans to remove Lugo and the degree to which the Vice President might participate.

The text refers to political actors, informants who kept an eye on Franco and reported how an agreement had been reached with the coup plotter General

Lino Oviedo to accelerate plans for an impeachment, so that the Vice President could take power, with Oveido eventually elected as Vice President.

The report from the U.S. embassy in Asunción, revealed by Wikileaks, makes reference to the interest many politicians had in cutting short Lugo’s administration. The document indicated that rumors persisted that Lino Oviedo, former President Nicanor Duarte Frutos, and/or Vice President Federico Franco, were continuing to seek ways to limit Lugo’s term

The message, sent by the embassy to the State Department in Washington, referred to “political sharks” surrounding the President and indicated that U.S. personnel in Paraguay believed that he was under a lot of pressure to resign or face impeachment, a possibility which the composers of the letter considered increasingly likely.

Informed daily of all events at the highest levels of government, taking advantage of the complicity of every “shark,” those who longed for the days of Stroessner’s iron fist only needed the U.S. embassy’s espionage services to guide their steps.

from Granma

Paraguay: US makes gains from coup against Lugo

Federico Fuentes

Whether Paraguay’s infamously right-wing local oligarchy and its parties that seized an opportunity to bring left-leaning President Fernando Lugo down by itself, or whether the push came from the United States government, is yet to be confirmed.

The US was involved in the overthrow of many governments in Latin America in 20th century in a bid to sure up its domination of the region.

The US also supported a 2009 coup that overthrew elected Honduran president Manuel Zelaya, who had raised the minimum wage paid by US corporations in the textile industry and blocked privatisations. In the past decade, it has also been implicated in failed coup attempts against elected governments in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.

However, whether the key movers were the Paraguayan oligarchs or US forces is a secondary consideration. The US state and US corporations operate through local intermediaries — the Paraguayan oligarchy — and have made no effort to conceal their intentions to use the recent coup to advance their agenda.

The coup has provided the US with a golden opportunity to work to reverse its declining influence in the region — and send a clear message to those willing to challenge its interests.

Paraguay is nestled between South America’s two largest economies — Argentina and Brazil — and its membership of regional integration bodies such as the Union of South American Nations (Unasur) and the Common Market of the South (Mercosur) gives it strategic importance for US interests.

By removing Lugo via an illegitimate coup only nine months out from elections, the US and its allies sent a message that, having lost the ability to keep control through formal democratic means, they are willing to use others.

The coup also gave the US an opportunity to escalate its military presence in the region.

The same day Lugo was impeached by Congress, a delegation of Paraguayan politicians, led by the head of the parliamentary defence committee and opposition member Jose Lopez Chavez, met with US military chiefs to negotiate the establishment of a US military base in the Chaco region.

Lopez Chavez said another topic of discussions was restarting US military “humanitarian assistance” programs in Paraguay, which had been halted by Lugo in 2009.

The Paraguayan oligarchy has made clear its intentions of allowing the US to turn the country into a base for military operations, with its sights set on Latin America’s radical governments.

As Lopez Chavez explained after a meeting in August last year with 21 US generals, the hope was that a US base would help Paraguay “liberate itself from the pressures, the threats from Bolivia, and even more so the threats that are constantly emerging from the Bolivarianism of Hugo Chavez.”

In June, US General Douglas M Fraser, head of the US Southern Command, also singled out Venezuela and Bolivia as potential hotspots for “geopolitical turbulence” that could affect US interests in the region.

Those that have been campaigning in support of Latin America’s turbulent process of transition face the urgent task of exposing the role of US imperialism, its corporations and its allies in Paraguay’s, and their bid to stop the process of regional integration across Latin America.

There is also a need to support the Paraguayan resistance to the coup and redoubling our solidarity with the anti-imperialist Bolivarian Alliance of the People’s of Our America (ALBA) led by Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Velvet Coup

John Cherian

Ousted President Fernando Lugo in the capital, Asuncion, on June 12. The recent violence over land disputes triggered his impeachment.

The ouster of the Paraguayan President, Fernando Lugo, in a legislative coup in the third week of June came as a surprise. Neither the citizens of the country nor the governments of the region were prepared for such a scenario. President Lugo was all set to demit office next year after the completion of a constitutionally mandated five-year term. During a visit to New Delhi in May this year, he had told this correspondent that he had absolutely no plans of changing the country’s Constitution in order to seek a second term.

The event that triggered the present crisis in the landlocked Latin American country was a clash between landless peasants and the police in mid-June. Seventeen people – six police officers and 11 farmers – died in the incident.

The country’s legislature, comprising the Lower House and the Senate, was quick to pass resolutions impeaching the President on charges of “malfeasance”, including complicity in the killings over the land dispute. The other charges levelled against him included earlier instances of encouragement of squatters to take over big farms and his alleged failure to act decisively against the Paraguayan People’s Army, a small left-wing guerilla group. The impeachment charges against Lugo presented in the legislature included the statement: “The constant confrontation and struggle of social classes, which as a final result brought about the massacre between compatriots, is an unprecedented development in the annals of history from independence till today.”

The impeachment proceedings went ahead despite Lugo describing the loss of lives as “unfortunate”. He had promptly sacked the chief of the police force and the Interior Minister, both of whom were personally close to him. The country’s Supreme Court and also the Superior Court of Electoral Justice ruled that the impeachment did not violate the Constitution. The judgments have ruled out the possibility of the presidency being restored to Lugo.

The bloody violence erupted when the police moved in to force 150 peasants out of a 2,000-hectare farm in a remote reserved forest area called Curuguaty near the border with Brazil. The farm was owned by a prominent politician belonging to the right-wing Colorado Party, which had monopolised power for most of the last century. The peasant organisations in the area claimed that the forest land was illegally acquired during the days the country was under a dictatorship. They had demanded that the land be redistributed among needy peasant families who tilled the land.

Alfredo Stroessner, who ruled with an iron hand for 35 years, routinely parcelled out land to senior military officials, civilian supporters and foreign corporations. Peasants were forcibly evicted from the land they had occupied for generations.

The agrarian situation got further complicated with the introduction of soya farming in the eastern part of the country. The soya farming sector is dominated by big Brazilian companies.

This correspondent had asked President Lugo about the criticisms regarding the slow pace of land reforms. He had explained that comprehensive land reforms were impossible as there were too many claimants to the land. Decades of corrupt authoritarian rule had left every single piece of available land with duplicate or triplicate titles of ownership. But from recent events, it is obvious that the landless are getting restive and, in many areas, were taking the law into their own hands and seizing land belonging to the elite. Among Latin American countries, inequality in land distribution is the highest in Paraguay. Two per cent of the population controls over 77 per cent of the land, while small farmers, who constitute 44 per cent of the population, own just 5 per cent of the arable land.

Many left-wing groups felt that President Lugo had given in to pressure from the elite, sacrificing his reforms policy and, instead, focussing on attracting transnational investment in the farming sector. The country has been enjoying spectacular growth rates owing to the worldwide demand for soya. Paraguay is the world’s fifth largest soya producer.

Lugo, who was known as the “Bishop of the Poor” during his days in the Catholic Church, had come to power with the support of the Authentic Radical Liberal Party, representing the wealthy landed elite. The party’s aim in supporting Lugo was to defeat its traditional rivals, the Colorado Party. But on assuming the presidency, Lugo gave many of the top jobs to his left-wing supporters. The honeymoon with the Liberals was short-lived, and Lugo was left without a legislative majority from the outset of his presidency. At the fag end of his term, the legislature has chosen to impeach him.

New President

Vice-President Frederico Franco, a right-wing politician belonging to the Liberal Party, was promptly elevated to the presidency. Franco constituted a new Cabinet comprising mainly representatives from the two traditional parties – the Colorado and the Liberals. Paraguay was under the authoritarian rule of the Colorado Party for 62 years. The one-party rule ended only in 1989.

In one of his first pronouncements after becoming President, Franco said that the removal of Lugo had saved the country from becoming a “pro-Chavez satellite”. The right-wing parties in Paraguay were not happy with Lugo’s decision to support Venezuela’s full membership of the regional grouping Mercosur (Common Southern Market). Venezuelan Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro, who was in Asuncion, the capital of Paraguay, as part of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) delegation, described Lugo’s removal as a “new type of coup”.

Venezuela has recalled its Ambassador and suspended oil shipments to Paraguay. “For us, the President of Paraguay is still Fernando Lugo. We do not recognise this new government,” said Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Argentina and Ecuador have all pulled out their envoys after the “coup”. Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico are among the countries that have recalled their Ambassadors from Asuncion for consultations.

Brazil, which is Paraguay’s most important neighbour, condemned the “summary impeachment”. It has indicated that sanctions could be implemented, but, so far, it has not broken diplomatic relations, unlike most of Paraguay’s other neighbours. Brazil has a big stake in the Paraguayan economy, including the joint ownership of the Itaipu dam located on the border with the two countries. It is one of the biggest hydroelectric projects in the world.

President Rafael Correa of Ecuador said that the region “cannot gloss over this legalistic nonsense”. UNASUR has a “democracy clause” in its Constitution. Paraguay could be expelled from the 12-member grouping if it is found guilty of violating this clause. Many leaders of the region are comparing the events in Paraguay to the coup that overthrew Manuel Zelaya in Honduras three years ago. The Barack Obama administration in the United States had supported the military coup in Honduras. Washington has not yet made its position clear on Paraguay, but it has no love lost for the left-wing leaders of the region. The U.S. had more than doubled the military aid to the Paraguayan military last year ostensibly to combat drug trafficking.

Horacio Cartes, a leading Senator belonging to the Colorado Party and a frontrunner in the presidential election scheduled to be held next year, led the move to impeach Lugo. WikiLeaks published a confidential U.S. State Department memo which described Cartes as the man responsible for “80 per cent of the money laundering in Paraguay” on behalf of the drug traffickers. The U.S. has strong ties with the Colorado Party. Five successive U.S. administrations had supported Stroessner despite his brutal ways because he was an avowed anti-communist.

President Evo Morales of Bolivia said the coup in Paraguay “was gestated by neoliberals in collaboration with local landowners and the empire”, a reference to the U.S. Canada, Germany and Spain have already recognised the new government in Paraguay.

UNASUR and the Organisation of American States (OAS) also had special meetings to discuss the situation in Paraguay. The OAS general secretary, Jose Miguel Insulza, has “voiced” the doubts of the international community over whether the events leading to the dismissal of the Paraguayan President had not violated “universal principles of due process and legitimate law”.

The ousted President is also not taking things lying down. In the last week of June, Lugo announced that he was rallying his supporters domestically and lobbying for support internationally. He has announced the creation of a parallel Cabinet in order to resist what he termed “a parliamentary coup”. His supporters have formed a “national front for the defence of democracy”.

Marches are being held regularly in Asuncion and elsewhere to protest against the impeachment of the President. Paraguay has already been suspended from Mercosur.

The regional grouping had expressed the “most energetic condemnation of the rupture of the democratic order – and for not having respected due process”.

A Progressive President of Paraguay Was Never in the CIA’s Cards

Wayne Madsen

The recent «institutional coup» against President Fernando Lugo of Paraguay reflects a long-standing desire by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to prevent any candidate not reflecting the policies of Paraguay’s entrenched oligarchy from ever attaining the presidency of that nation.

According to a formerly SECRET CIA Directorate of Intelligence’s Office of African and Latin American Analysis research paper, uncovered from the U.S. National Archives and dated August 1985, the CIA never planned for a non-member of the conservative Colorado Party from ever succeeding long-time Paraguayan dictator General Alfredo Stroessner.

The Paraguayan dictator, who ruled Paraguay from 1954 to 1989 with the backing of the CIA and the Pentagon, was one of America’s staunchest Latin American allies. Stroessner, a Colorado Party stalwart, supported the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965 and sent Paraguayan military officer to the infamous School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia for training. Stroessner also participated in Operation CONDOR, Henry Kissinger’s brainchild that saw Paraguay, along with six other Latin American nations – Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Peru, and Uruguay — coordinate cross-border state terror and assassination operations against leftist officials and labor and student leaders, and even offered to send Paraguayan troops to fight with the United States in South Vietnam.

After Stroessner was ousted in a bloody military coup in 1989 over fears he was grooming one of his two sons as his successor. Stroessner was ousted by Colorado Party member General Andres Rodriqguez, who ruled until 1993. Rodriguez was succeeded by a series of Colorado Party politicians – Juan Carlos Wasmosy, Raul Cubas, Luis Gonzalez, and Nicanor Duarte, until Lugo, the Marxist «liberation theology» former Roman Catholic bishop, was elected president in 2008. The leader of the Patriotic Alliance for Change, Lugo was the first non-Colorado Party member to serve as president since 1948.

Lugo was ousted in a politicized impeachment process engineered by the Colorado Party and supported by Vice President Federico Franco of the very much misnamed Authentic Radical Liberal Party, which is neither «radical» nor «liberal» but represents Paraguay’s business elite and is a member of Liberal International, which includes other pro-business «liberals» such as British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats, in coalition with Tory Prime Minister David Cameron, and German Free Democratic Party of Guido Westerwelle, who serves in right-wing Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet as foreign minister

The CIA research paper, titled «Paraguay: Potential Successors to Stoessner,»states that in 1985, «the 72-year-old President Alfred [sic] Stroessner is not expected to leave office anytime soon». In fact, Stroessner was ousted in a coup some three and a half years after the CIA’s faulty prognostication. However, the CIA did anticipate that Stroessner’s eventual successors would only come from the ranks of the corrupt Colorado Party.

The CIA document states «leading contenders, in our judgment, include Supreme Court Chief Justice and traditionalist Colorado politician Luis Argana; veteran traditionalist Colorado leaders Edgar Insfran and Juan Manuel Frutos; the Defense Minister, Maj. Gen. Gaspar Martinez; and a respected senior military officer, Gen. Gerardo Johannsen».

The CIA gave all these Colorado politicians a clean bill of health by stating, «any of these men would be likely to maintain Paraguay’s pro-West foreign policy». In the CIA’s world, any leader, no matter how blood thirsty and dictatorial, was fine as long as they remained pro-Western. It is the same construct that was used by the Obama administration to drive from power Manuel Zelaya of Honduras and Lugo and be replaced by more pro-Western leaders. And the same «institutional coup» template is being used to stage a constitutional crisis in El Salvador between the ARENA right-wing opposition-dominated Supreme Court and the leftist Farabundo Marti National Liberation (FMLN) party of President Mauricio Funes.

And the CIA’s document predicted to ascension to power post-Stroessner of General Rodriguez, who ousted Stroessner in 1989. The document states: «A likely key power broker during a transition would be Maj. Gen. Andres Rodriguez, an Army corps commander whose power is second only to Stroessner’s». That sentence is followed by a redaction, sometimes an indicator that a named individual has an intelligence asset relationship with the CIA. The paragraph continues, «Because of his notoriety, we believe he [Rodriguez] would operate behind the scenes in a transition, rather than seek the presidency». The document iterates that if Rodriguez were to assume power in a political vacuum situation it «might lead Rodriguez to seize power and impose a tough authoritarian government» and that «relations between such a regime and the United States would probably be subject to strains over human rights and drug trafficking». In fact, after Rodriguez seized power in 1989 from Stroessner in a textbook Latin American coup, bereft of a succession struggle, Washington maintained good relations with Paraguay.

The CIA clearly favored Chief Justice Argana as an eventual successor to Stroessner based solely on «his ability to avoid antagonizing military leaders as he has risen in the [Colorado] party ranks». The CIA analysts pointed out that Argana, according to U.S. embassy officials in Asuncion, the Paraguayan capital, was not considered «honest,» pointing to his past links with General Rodriguez.

The CIA also appeared to favor the chief of the powerful Rural Welfare Institute [the former Land Reform Agency], Senator Juan Manuel Frutos, the son of a former president. He was described as «tenaciously anti-Communist,» a pre-requisite for American support. It was the controversial issue of land reform and providing arable land to Paraguay’s poor campesinos that sparked the institutional coup against Lugo. Paraguay’s wealthy landowners, most Colorado Party supporters, are averse to any kind of land reform that would see the nation’s landless peasants provided with useful acreage for growing crops and thus competing with the monopolistic landowners.

The CIA sounded a discordant note on Defense Minister Gaspar Martinez, reporting that the U.S. embassy had reported in 1983 that Martinez had «amassed large sums of money». The remainder of the paragraph on Martinez’s money is redacted.

However, a clue to what was redacted may be found in a letter, dated March 5, 1985, from the chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, Charles Rangel of New York, to CIA director William J. Casey. The letter states: «The Washington Post of February 27, 1985, reports that your agency has provided Senators Alphonse M. D’Amato and Arlen Specter with a report alleging the involvement of the notorious Nazi war criminal, Josef Mengele, in the narcotics traffic in Paraguay around 1970. Would you kindly provide this Committee with that report?»

The CIA paid little heed to the Paraguayan opposition parties, including the Liberal Party and the Radical Liberal Party, authorized «opposition» parties with little organization, manpower, or finances. The illegal National Accord of four opposition parties – the Christian Democrats, Authentic Radical Liberals, the Popular Colorado Movement, and the Revolutionary Febrerista Party – were also seen as weak and suffering from years in exile, mainly in Argentina. In hindsight, weakness by the exiled opposition, including current President Franco’s Authentic Radical Liberals, made them ripe for co-option by agencies like the CIA.

A 1983 Spanish-language broadcast by Radio Moscow, translated into English by the CIA’s Foreign Broadcast Information Service, appears to provide more realistic intelligence about the situation in Paraguay than can be found in the CIA’s own intelligence report on the country. The Radio Moscow report was on the following issue: Director of Paraguayan Communist Party’s bulletin Adelante, on torture carried out by Stroessner regime. Says that CIA agents are training Paraguayan police personnel on various methods of torture».

Considering today’s penchant of the United States for torture, it can also be assumed that the clock will soon be set back in Paraguay to the CIA’s «good old days.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

LEFTY OBAMA ?

CIA Allegedly Using Drug Money to Overthrow Ecuador President Rafael Correa

Matías Rojas

Infowars.com

November 8, 2012

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is using drug money to fund Rafael Correa’s opposition in the coming 2013 Ecuadorian elections, intelligence sources have revealed to Chilean independent media. The accusations do not stand alone. In October, former UK diplomat Craig Murray said that the CIA had tripled its budget to destabilize the government of Ecuador.

The allegations were made public by President Rafael Correa on November 3rd on national television, just days after his official visit to Chile to meet with President Sebastian Piñera.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDtUUPpTTVg&feature=player_embedded

For translation, click on the CC (captions) widget, choose Spanish, then select Translate and English (or preferred language).

Correa reaffirmed information that appeared in an article written by Chilean independent media outlet Panoramas News, revealing that the CIA and DEA stations in Chile were running a narcotics trafficking network through that country with the full knowledge of Chilean authorities and police.

One of the sources quoted by Chilean media, a former police officer in the Policia de Investigaciones (PDI) by the name of Fernando Ulloa, said that 300 kilograms of cocaine were entering Chile monthly under the escort of members of his own institution, the Carabineros, and the Chilean Army. In May 2011, Fernando Ulloa met with then Chilean Minister of Interior Rodrigo Hinzpeter in La Moneda to inform him about the drug network. After more than one year, the Piñera’s government had done nothing to investigate the case.

The scandal resurfaced again after 10 Chilean cops were detained with links to a minor drug smuggling ring, not connected to the one Ulloa was exposing. Although Chilean television was more open to talk about police corruption, Ulloa was only interviewed by two TV networks,

Minister Rodrigo Hinzpeter of covering up the larger narcotics ring he was investigating before being kicked out of his job as PDI inspector.

The links to US intelligence emerged after an anonymous source from the Agencia Nacional de Inteligencia (ANI) told Panoramas News that the smuggling of 300 kilos of cocaine was in fact a highly sensitive CIA/DEA operation that would help to raise money to topple the government of Ecuador. The operation is similar to the one carried out by the Agency in Central America during the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980’s, the source said.

The director of Panoramas News, journalist Patricio Mery Bell, was planning to hand over the information to Rafael Correa while the Ecuadorian President was visiting Chile, but he was strangely accused of beating a woman after she stole his cell-phone. The cell-phone memory contained a video testimony of Mery’s intelligence source, destined to be passed to Correa, but it ended up in the hands of the police after the mysterious incident.

Once he was in Ecuador, President Rafael Correa connected the dots and decided to go public with the information. He quoted Murray’s early warnings about the CIA’s intent to “fund, bribe or blackmail media and officials”, originally written in the former diplomat’s own blog, adding that the Agency was dealing drugs just as Oliver North had done during the Contra support effort.

In an interview with NTN24, journalist Patricio Mery added more details to the case, relating the cover-up of the CIA drug dealing operation to the deaths of two different people in the last seven years: former soldier Fabian Vega, who was found hung in the northern city of Calama in 2005, and young citizen Nestor Madariaga Juantok, found death with two bullets in the port of Valparaiso in 2006. Both were ruled as suicides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFhem4EBrZc&feature=player_embedded

For translation, click on the CC (captions) widget, choose Spanish, then select Translate and English (or preferred language).

Mery also gave the name of the alleged CIA liaison with the Chilean Navy, former captain Jesus Saez Luna, who is now being held in a penitentiary after he mysteriously escaped from Navy custody. Saez Luna was described in his arrest as the biggest drug dealer of the coastal city of Viña del Mar, with networks in Santiago de Chile and the Bio-Bio southern region of the country. Known as “El Marino”, the former captain utilized “military intelligence” tactics to avoid detection by police, according to the Chilean newspaper La Segunda.

The case is being depicted as “Chile-Contras”, in reference to the history of CIA narcotics trafficking in Nicaragua. This is just another example of how drug money is used to fund covert operations, such as the ones we have seen in Syria, with whole guerrilla armies and opposition forces being financed to overthrow countries that aren’t part of the Anglo-American establishment and don’t bow to American corporate interests.

==============================================================

Ecuador: Chilean Journalist Reports CIA In Operation to Prevent Correa’s reelection

Posted on November 4, 2012

===========================

Elmercurio.com.ec reported that President Rafael Correa, picked up a complaint filed by a Chilean journalist on alleged operation of Central Intelligence Agency U.S. (CIA) to destabilize his government and prevent his reelection. In his usual Saturday report, released yesterday but recorded on Friday, the president said that this claim coincides with another presented a few days ago by a former diplomat English.

“You have to be very attentive” to these complaints that point to avoid another “suelazo (fall to the ground)” of “the oligarchy and the empire (U.S.)” by the recent re-election of President Hugo Chavez, Correa said. He recalled that a week ago the complaint was met British former Ambassador Craig Murray, who warned that the CIA will invest more than $ 80 million to try that Correa is not reelected in the elections of February.

According to the Ecuadorian president, that money would go to “buy journalists, making a fuss, to destabilize the government of Correa” and prevent his reelection.

Correa said another complaint in the same tone appeared this week when the Chilean journalist Patricio Mery Bell warned of an alleged international plot to destabilize the Government of Ecuador and restore U.S. hegemony in the region

=============================

According to Chilean journalist, the CIA has prepared an operation to destabilize the regime.

El presidente, Rafael Correa, recogió una denuncia presentada por un periodista chileno sobre una supuesta operación de la Agencia Central de Inteligencia de Estados Unidos (CIA) para desestabilizar su Gobierno y evitar su reelección. The president, Rafael Correa, picked up a complaint filed by a Chilean journalist on alleged operation of Central Intelligence Agency U.S. (CIA) to destabilize his government and prevent his reelection.

En su habitual informe de los sábados, emitido ayer pero grabado el viernes, el mandatario dijo que esa denuncia coincide con otra presentada hace algunos días por un exdiplomático inglés. In his usual Saturday report, released yesterday but recorded on Friday, the president said that this claim coincides with another presented a few days ago by a former diplomat English.

“Hay que estar muy atentos” a estas denuncias que apuntarían a evitar otro “suelazo (caída al suelo)” de “la oligarquía y el imperio (EE.UU.)” por la reciente reelección del presidente venezolano, Hugo Chávez, señaló Correa. "You have to be very attentive" to these complaints that point to avoid another "suelazo (fall to the ground)" of "the oligarchy and the empire (U.S.)" by the recent re-election of President Hugo Chavez, Correa said .

Recordó que hace una semana se conoció la denuncia del exembajador británico Craig Murray, quien advirtió que la CIA invertirá más de 80 millones de dólares para intentar que Correa no sea reelegido en los comicios de febrero próximo. He recalled that a week ago the complaint was met British former Ambassador Craig Murray, who warned that the CIA will invest more than $ 80 million to try that Correa is not reelected in the elections of February.

Según el mandatario ecuatoriano, ese dinero estaría destinado a “comprar periodistas, hacer escándalo, desestabilizar al Gobierno de Correa” e impedir su reelección. According to the Ecuadorian president, that money would go to "buy journalists, making a fuss, to destabilize the government of Correa" and prevent his reelection.

Correa dijo que otra denuncia en el mismo tono apareció esta semana cuando el periodista chileno Patricio Mery Bell advirtió de un supuesto complot internacional para desestabilizar al Gobierno de Ecuador y recuperar la hegemonía de EE.UU. Correa said another complaint in the same tone appeared this week when the Chilean journalist Patricio Mery Bell warned of an alleged international plot to destabilize the Government of Ecuador and restore U.S. hegemony en la región. in the region.

Mery Bell, señaló el presidente ecuatoriano, ha sido detenido por la supuesta agresión a una mujer que, según Correa, sería “una trampa, porque había denunciado manejos ilegales, entre ellos de droga” por parte de la CIA y del Departamento Antinarcóticos (DEA), “para tratar de desestabilizar al Gobierno ecuatoriano”. Mery Bell said the Ecuadorian president, has been arrested for allegedly assaulting a woman who, according to Correa, would be "a trap, because he had denounced illegal dealings, including drug" by the CIA and the Narcotics Squad (DEA ), "to try to destabilize the government of Ecuador."

Correa, además, mostró un video preparado por su equipo de comunicación en el que destacó un despacho del portal informativo Panorama News sobre “la curiosa detención” de Bell. Correa also showed a video prepared by his communications team in an office that highlighted the information portal Panorama News about "the curious arrest" of Bell.

Además reprodujo parte del artículo: “Según esta fuente, la internación de cerca de 300 kilos mensuales de cocaína, es parte de una operación de alto nivel dirigida y monitoreada desde las estaciones de la CIA y la DEA de la embajada norteamericana para obtener fondos para financiar operaciones encubiertas que no son fiscalizadas o controladas por el Congreso de EE.UU.”. Also reproduced from the article: "According to this source, the internment of nearly 300 kilos of cocaine per month, is part of a high-level operation directed and monitored from the stations of the CIA and the DEA of the U.S. Embassy to raise funds for finance covert operations are not controlled or monitored by the U.S. Congress. " El objetivo, señala el reporte, es “desestabilizar al Gobierno del Ecuador…”. The goal, says the report, is "to destabilize the government of Ecuador ...". QUITO.- (EFE) QUITO. - (EFE)

Oficialismo apunta a control del Legislativo Oficialismo Legislative control targets

El presidente, Rafael Correa, aseguró que en los comicios de febrero próximo el oficialismo debe apuntar a alcanzar el control de la Asamblea Nacional legislativa y obtener la elección de una “mayoría contundente” de legisladores. The president, Rafael Correa, said that in the upcoming February elections the ruling should aim to achieve the control of the National Assembly legislative election and get an "overwhelming majority" of lawmakers.

Al hablar, según precisó, como líder máximo de AP, el mandatario dijo: “Tenemos no sólo que ganar la Presidencia, sino una mayoría contundente en la Asamblea para continuar con nuestra revolución”. Speaking, as stated, as supreme leader of AP, the president said: "We have not only to win the presidency, but an overwhelming majority in the Assembly to continue our revolution."

Aseguró que esta vez no permitirá que AP proponga candidatos a la Legislatura que luego se retiran del movimiento y se pasan a la oposición, como ha sucedido con unos ocho asambleístas que en principio eran aliados suyos. He said that this time will not allow AP propose candidates for the Legislature to then withdraw the motion and passed to the opposition, as has happened with about eight assemblymen who were initially allies.

Por eso, reveló que una comisión de AP, en la que él mismo participa, revisa “prolijamente” las listas de candidatos a asambleístas. So, revealed that a committee of AP, in which he participates, check "neatly" lists of candidates for assembly.

Pese a que AP es el grupo parlamentario con el mayor número de legisladores, Correa aseguró que la falta de una mayoría oficialista en la Asamblea “ha impedido grandemente el avance de la revolución, el avance de la legislación”. Although AP is the parliamentary group with the largest number of lawmakers, Correa said that the lack of a government majority in the Assembly "has greatly impeded the progress of the revolution, the advance of the legislation."

“Ese es el gran desafío para los próximos cuatro años: una mayoría contundente en la Asamblea”, apuntó. "That is the great challenge for the next four years: an overwhelming majority in the Assembly," he said. (EFE) (EFE)

Detalles Details

- Correa recordó la trama “Irán-Contras” o “Irangate”, que involucró a un exasesor de EE.UU. - Correa recalled the plot "Iran-Contra" or "Irangate", involving a U.S. exasesor en la venta ilegal de armas a Irán y la financiación a la contrarrevolución en Nicaragua. in the illegal sale of arms to Iran and funding to the contras in Nicaragua.

- El presidente dijo que por no tener mayoría total no se han aprobado leyes importantes, como la de comunicación, establecida en la Constitución y ratificada en consulta popular. - The president said that having no overall majority have not passed important legislation, such as communication, established in the Constitution, ratified in referendum.

=============================

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LEFTY OBAMA ?

Honduras // Paraguay // Ecuador COUPS

Everything Old Is New Again

The Washington Post Ignores Coups in Article on Threats to Latin American Democracy

Written by Keane Bhatt, Manufacturing Contempt

Tuesday, 31 July 2012 13:22

Source: NACLA

On Sunday, July 22, The Washington Post published “Latin America’s new authoritarians,” in which its author, Juan Forero, carries on the newspaper’s longstanding practice of selective and hyperbolic criticisms of the hemisphere’s governments. Forero intends to shed light on “a new kind of authoritarian leader…rising in several countries: democratically elected presidents who are ruling in increasingly undemocratic ways.”

One may recall the Post’s strained attempts to illustrate this trend, like an April 19 editorial that accused President Cristina Kirchner of Argentina of practicing “autocratic populism” simply for pushing to re-nationalize the Spanish oil company Repsol YPF with overwhelming public support. The newspaper was later ridiculed for a June 20 editorial, which introduced the democratically elected president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, as a “small-time South American autocrat” in its opening sentence and accused him of “wallowing” in “anti-American slanders and paranoia” as he decides whether to provide WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange with political asylum.

Forero’s feature—published as a news article, not an opinion piece—nevertheless contains the kind of strong, unsubstantiated opinions that characterize the Post’s editorials. He asserts, for example, that “charismatic populists are posing the most serious challenge to democratic institutions in Latin America since the 1980s.” Forero is referring to countries like Ecuador, Bolivia, and Venezuela, the last of which, according to his article, is a “growing, alarming” threat to the region, “led by a captivating, messianic leader with an ample oil-fueled coffer under his control, [who] is determined to see smaller countries copy its model.”

Unsurprisingly, Forero remains silent on the advent of a different model that’s being applied in smaller countries: the parliamentary coup. These coups replace elected governments with de facto ones while providing a specious imprimatur of legality. President Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, the parliamentary coup’s most recent victim, described the trend: “You can call this a coup d’etat 2.0, a parliamentary coup or an express coup—many names for the same thing, a coup that is different than what we saw in the 1970s: there are no tanks or dead in the streets, and they are very careful to try to give the entire thing some kind of legal legitimacy.” Lugo traces this pattern back to 2009, saying that “[t]he laboratory for all of this was three years ago in Honduras. And here in Paraguay it was perfected.” Even so, in Forero’s account of “creeping authoritarianism” in the region, it’s as if two prominent examples of this phenomenon—the Honduran coup and last month’s illegitimate ouster of Lugo—never happened.

*

The circumstances behind the parliamentary coup in Honduras are as follows: President Manuel Zelaya arranged for a non-binding referendum to be held in June 2009, to probe the interest of citizens to set up a constituent assembly to redraft the constitution in November of that year. When the head of the military balked at Zelaya’s order to distribute materials in advance of the plebescite, Zelaya fired him. The Honduran Supreme Court ruled that this was illegal, and the military subsequently kidnapped him at gunpoint and spirited him out of the country. Economist Mark Weisbrot, one of the keenest observers of the Honduran ouster, cut through a smokescreen of procedural trivialities:

Supporters of the coup argue that the president violated the law by attempting to go ahead with the referendum after the Supreme Court ruled against it. This is a legal question; it may be true, or it may be that the Supreme Court had no legal basis for its ruling. But it is irrelevant to what has happened: the military is not the arbiter of a constitutional dispute between the various branches of government. This is especially true in this case, in that the proposed referendum was a non-binding and merely consultative plebiscite. It would not have changed any law nor affected the structure of power; it was merely a poll of the electorate. Therefore, the military cannot claim that it acted to prevent any irreparable harm. This is a military coup carried out for political purposes.

In the case of Paraguay, the elected president, Fernando Lugo, faced impeachment in June after a violent land dispute left six police officers and 11 peasant farmers dead (although there is no evidence that Lugo was responsible for the police actions). Lugo fired his interior minister and proposed an investigation into the incident, but the rightwing opposition pressed for his removal under the vague indictment of “poor performance of duties,” and granted Lugo only one day to prepare a two-hour rebuttal. Weisbrot noted that this was “a clear violation of Article 17 of Paraguay’s constitution, which provides for the right to an adequate defense.”

The particulars, however, are less relevant than the fact that the impeachment’s rationale could have been anything at all. A State Department cable released by WikiLeaks predicted last month’s events, reporting in 2009 that opposition leaders had been eager to “[c]apitalize on any Lugo mis-steps” because their “dream scenario involves legally impeaching Lugo, even if on spurious grounds.” This would “assure their own political supremacy.”

*

Surely the forcible overthrow of elected leaders is a far more serious challenge to democratic institutions than the rise of “charismatic populists.” Given the rightwing accomplishments in Honduras and Paraguay of subverting the most basic of democratic protocols, it’s absurd for Forero to ignore these events in favor of detailing the “new authoritarianism” of leaders who he admits are “democratically elected,” who “do not assassinate opposition figures or declare martial law,” and who preside over republics with “active news media, political opposition and civil society organizations.”

Meanwhile, Honduras has experienced both the assassination of opposition figures and virtual martial law; credible reports estimate that state security forces have killed hundreds of civilians in three short years. In comparison, Forero’s gravest charges against Venezuela and Ecuador are “arbitrary arrests.” Similarly, Forero’s article raises alarms over Correa’s lawsuit against newspaper editors for libel but makes no mention that over 20 journalistsimpunity in Honduras since the coup. Exaggerations also abound, as with Forero’s contention that the Venezuelan government manages a “vast state media apparatus.” This claim is similar to a canard of Jackson Diehl, The Washington Post’s deputy editorial page editor, who in 2010 decried “the regime’s domination of the media.” The truth, however, is that in over a decade, state television has never captured even 10% of Venezuela’s audience. have been murdered with

*

More insidious than the Post’s selective, exaggerated coverage is its thesis that the United States is “looking the other way” in the face of the “growing threat to hard-won democratic gains” in the hemisphere. Forero quotes Santiago Canton of the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights, who contends that “a country that just doesn’t act is the United States,” permitting “things to happen that shouldn’t be permitted.” Forero and Canton decline to consider that the United States—characterized in the article as one of the “most vibrant and influential” democracies in the hemisphere—is actually a proactive interloper that has sought to undermine the democracies of sovereign countries like Venezuela in 2002 and Haiti in 2010. At present, the United States stymies democratic processes in Honduras by providing $50 million a year to the illegitimate regime’s notoriously repressive police and military. This is an example not of U.S. standoffishness but of ongoing material support to an authoritarian regime.

In fact, the long-term success of the parliamentary coup would have been impossible without U.S. support in 2009. While there is no direct evidence that the United States played an active role in overthrowing Zelaya, Washington never called for his unconditional restitution (nor has it done so in the case of Lugo). And when the repressive military dictatorship that succeeded Zelaya carried out a fraudulent election marred by violence, the United States provided decisive backing for it. In the lead-up to this sham, a State Department official offered the following justification to Time Magazine: “[T]he elections are going to take place either way, and the international community needs to come to terms with that fact.”

Washington also provided its blessing for the dictatorship’s elections through the National Democratic Institute, an organization largely financed by Congress that monitors voting processes as a part of its charge to “support and strengthen democratic institutions worldwide.” NDI sent election observers to Honduras, whereas election observers from the European Union, Organization of American States, the United Nations, and the Carter Center abstained from monitoring an inherently undemocratic charade. NDI cloaked this political decision in the disingenuous language of neutrality. It acknowledged the potential criticism that “holding these elections under current conditions would legitimize a coup d’etat and establish a precedent that could be used to unseat elected governments elsewhere,” but stated that the purpose of its election mission “was not to take a position on these larger political issues nor should its presence in Honduras be viewed as such.” When NDI reported on the “generally peaceful and orderly” nature of the vote, the U.S. press took its cue, and days later, a New York Times editorial began its first sentence as follows: “There is wide agreement that last week’s presidential election in Honduras, won by the conservative leader Porfirio Lobo, was clean and fair.” The success of Coup 2.0 was now all but guaranteed.

*

Buried in the middle of Forero’s piece is likely the real reason behind the newspaper’s inconsistent treatment of the various governments in the hemisphere. The Washington Post scrutinizes Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Nicaragua because “[a]ll vocally oppose the Obama administration, favor state intervention in the economy and have moved to strengthen alliances with Washington’s adversaries, among them Cuba, Iran and Russia.”

In one sentence, the Post reveals its firm allegiance to the priorities of the U.S. government and international investors, not to the principle that sovereign states have a right to manage their domestic and international affairs. The Post doesn’t criticize massive state interventions in the U.S. economy, nor does it question the prerogative of the United States to strengthen its military ties to dictatorships like Saudi Arabia—the Post is critical only when left governments in Latin America pursue policies with similar independence. These democratically elected governments have stayed in power precisely because they have brought widespread benefits to their poor majorities through greater economic sovereignty and democratic social reform—even if it means upsetting powerful investors or Washington.

*

Lugo, after being deposed, publicly recommended that “if one wants to support the democratic processes here, then the best you can do is to start following what is going on here. If the media reports on Paraguay, then that helps our democracy the most.” If The Washington Post is sincere in its concern for democracy in Latin America, it has much room for improvement—Forero’s article never once mentions the word “Paraguay.”

Keane Bhatt is an activist in Washington, D.C. He has worked in the United States and Latin America on a variety of campaigns related to community development and social justice. His analyses and opinions have appeared in a range of outlets, including NPR, The Nation, The St. Petersburg Times, CNN En Español, Truthout, and Upside Down World. He is the author of the new NACLA blog “Manufacturing Contempt,” which takes a critical look at the U.S. press and its portrayal of the hemisphere.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LEFTY OBAMA ?

CIA Allegedly Using Drug Money to Overthrow Ecuador President Rafael Correa

Matías Rojas

Infowars.com

November 8, 2012

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is using drug money to fund Rafael Correa’s opposition in the coming 2013 Ecuadorian elections, intelligence sources have revealed to Chilean independent media. The accusations do not stand alone. In October, former UK diplomat Craig Murray said that the CIA had tripled its budget to destabilize the government of Ecuador.

Craig Murray?? He made credible criticism of UK policy in Uzbekistan when he was ambassador there, but he never served in the Americas or a Romance language speaking country, there is no indication in his bio. on his website that he speaks Spanish; and has been out of the Foreign Service for 8 years.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/about-craig-murray/

The allegations were made public by President Rafael Correa on November 3rd on national television, just days after his official visit to Chile to meet with President Sebastian Piñera.

For translation, click on the CC (captions) widget, choose Spanish, then select Translate and English (or preferred language).

Correa reaffirmed information that appeared in an article written by Chilean independent media outlet Panoramas News, revealing that the CIA and DEA stations in Chile were running a narcotics trafficking network through that country with the full knowledge of Chilean authorities and police.

One of the sources quoted by Chilean media, a former police officer in the Policia de Investigaciones (PDI) by the name of Fernando Ulloa, said that 300 kilograms of cocaine were entering Chile monthly under the escort of members of his own institution, the Carabineros, and the Chilean Army. In May 2011, Fernando Ulloa met with then Chilean Minister of Interior Rodrigo Hinzpeter in La Moneda to inform him about the drug network. After more than one year, the Piñera’s government had done nothing to investigate the case.

The scandal resurfaced again after 10 Chilean cops were detained with links to a minor drug smuggling ring, not connected to the one Ulloa was exposing. Although Chilean television was more open to talk about police corruption, Ulloa was only interviewed by two TV networks,

Minister Rodrigo Hinzpeter of covering up the larger narcotics ring he was investigating before being kicked out of his job as PDI inspector.

The links to US intelligence emerged after an anonymous source from the Agencia Nacional de Inteligencia (ANI) told Panoramas News that the smuggling of 300 kilos of cocaine was in fact a highly sensitive CIA/DEA operation that would help to raise money to topple the government of Ecuador. The operation is similar to the one carried out by the Agency in Central America during the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980’s, the source said.

The director of Panoramas News, journalist Patricio Mery Bell, was planning to hand over the information to Rafael Correa while the Ecuadorian President was visiting Chile, but he was strangely accused of beating a woman after she stole his cell-phone. The cell-phone memory contained a video testimony of Mery’s intelligence source, destined to be passed to Correa, but it ended up in the hands of the police after the mysterious incident.

Rojas failed to disclose that he himself was the author of the Panoramas News article. He seems to be a conspiracy kook from his Wiki bio (which he seems to have written himself) "Rojas is also known on the Internet for his videos exposing the so-called New World Order conspiracy, false flag operations, eugenics, and more." He is very dishonest, the cited article made no mention of a cellphone or any other object be involved in the incident. Rojas omitted is that:

- this was Mery's 2nd arrest for assault in a month, he previously got into a fight with a hospital security guard.

- the "woman" is Mery's common law wife of 32 years, i.e. Mery is a wife beater who seems to have propensity for violence.

Mery seems to be a rather obscure figure and Roja's story makes little sense. If his boss's wife was 'in on it' she easily could have erased the video while was sleeping or even worse planted drugs, kiddie porn etc. to discredit him and only an idiot would store the only copy of such a critical file on a cellphone.

Once he was in Ecuador, President Rafael Correa connected the dots and decided to go public with the information. He quoted Murray’s early warnings about the CIA’s intent to “fund, bribe or blackmail media and officials”, originally written in the former diplomat’s own blog, adding that the Agency was dealing drugs just as Oliver North had done during the Contra support effort.

In an interview with NTN24, journalist Patricio Mery added more details to the case, relating the cover-up of the CIA drug dealing operation to the deaths of two different people in the last seven years: former soldier Fabian Vega, who was found hung in the northern city of Calama in 2005, and young citizen Nestor Madariaga Juantok, found death with two bullets in the port of Valparaiso in 2006. Both were ruled as suicides.

Murray didn't make it clear what his source was, he mentioned "a former colleague in the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office" but did not state explicitly that his friend gave him this information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drug traffickers infiltrate Ecuador security forces

Posted on March 22, 2012 • Filed under: Colombia, Crime, Drug Activity, Ecuador, Mexico, Organized Crime, Police/Military Activity

The arrest of Juan Carlos Calle Serna is not an isolated event. Official figures indicate that their ties are linked to criminal cases dating, for example, 2009. On 2 October of that year, drug agents staged a raid in four provinces, seized 3.8 tons of cocaine and arrested two soldiers: one sergeant and a former Army intelligence agent who was a researcher for links to drug trafficking. Read Article

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



Ecuador's President Says CIA is Using Drug Profits to Destabilize His Country

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2045030/pg1

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ecuador Coup Attempt Engineered by the CIA

By Nil Nikandrov

Global Research, October 05, 2010

Strategic Culture Foundation 3 October 2010

Ecuador’s police forces played the key role in the coup attempt which shattered the country on September 30. The passing of a law affecting the police officers’ bonuses and job benefits became a pretext for the rebellion which erupted in the capital city of Quito and the Guayquil seaport town. Actually, the law was not supposed to entail pay reductions, but those who masterminded the coup managed to convince the police that it would and thus provoked the uprising.

The subsequent developments followed the traditional Latin American pattern: rebels created bases, set up roadblocks, and had all flights to and from Ecuador suspended. The country’s air force counting scores of US-trained officers partially sided with the police, while pilots from Venezuela who served in Ecuador in the framework of the military cooperation program were isolated. President Rafael Correa barely escaped death when he approached the police barracks to explain the reforms personally: shooting was audible around, he was sprayed with tear gas, and, moreover, several combat grenades exploded nearby. The president and his bodyguards took refuge in a military hospital which was promptly besieged by the rebel police forces and armed civilians evidently furnished by the opposition. The siege continued for several hours until special forces arrived and escorted Correa to the presidential palace.

Over the past several years the police of Ecuador was courted by the US Embassy which no doubt had its own interests in mind. Money from funds run by the FBI, the CIA, the DEA, and other US agencies was routinely poured into bonuses for the police top brass and operatives, equipment for various police divisions, etc. The cooperation became so cordial that occasionally the US intelligence community used Ecuador’s police and army intelligence service to keep under surveillance the country’s politicians, journalists, and others regarded as potential opponents of the US. Ecuador’s intelligence services rushed information to their US partners during the crisis that hit the country’s relations with Columbia after the latter bombed FARC camps in the territory of the former, leaving their own government blind to details of the situation.

The January, 2007 advent of Correa’s patriotic administration largely put an end to the abnormal arrangement as the Ecuadorian government started to regain control over the country’s agencies. Among other things, Correa forbade them to maintain unofficial ties with the US Embassy or get on its payroll. The efforts predictably angered Washington which, in one instance, demonstratively demanded that the Ecuadorian drug enforcement agency return the computers formerly supplied to it by DEA. The relations between Ecuador and the US saw another chill when Correa closed the US airbase in Mante. In response, Washington slammed Quito over its friendship with Venezuela and Nicaragua, diapproval of Plan Colombia, and the implementation of an original model of socialism.

The success of the operation which led to the ouster of president Manuel Zelaya in Honduras inspired the US hawks to put similar schemes to works elsewhere in Latin America, Washington’s eventual goal being to isolate Hugo Chavez and remove his allies from power across the region. The US Administration reckoned that Ecuador was the easiest target on its political hit list. Correa’s reforms meet with staunch resistance mounted by the local oligarchy, pro-US elites, and the army officers corps zombied in the notorious School of the Americas to fight communism which under present-day conditions circulates as a bracket term for whatever political movements Washington frowns upon.

The subversive activity targeting president Correa is coordinated by Heather Hodges who was appointed as the US ambassador to Ecuador in August, 2008.She did a job in Guatemala during the reign of its bloody dictator Rios Montt and served as deputy director of the US State Department’s Cuban division which is known to be tightly interwoven with the CIA. Mrs. Hodges also worked with USAID in several countries and served as the US ambassador to Moldova where her mission was to alienate the country’s leadership from Russia and to organize a color revolution with the help of pro-western NGOs and the energetic youths from the US Peace Corps. At the moment her trainees are employed by the CIA stations in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador.

US Secretary of State H. Clinton visited Quito last June to assess the situation from within and to probe into the possibility of reorienting president Correa from Chavez to the US, but failed to exact any concessions from the Ecuadorian leader. As a result, Hodges was instructed to launch the operation aimed at weakening Correa’s positions and – in the longer run – toppling him. USAID alone made a $40 mln financial infusion into the cause, former president Lucio being the key figure in the plot. Gutierrez’s disastrous presidency ended with his escape from the country. Following an amnesty, he challenged Correa in the 2009 presidential race which he explainably lost.

According to the coup blueprint drafted by the CIA, Gutierrez was to announce the removal of “dictator” Correa and the transfer of authority to a provisional government in a televised address. The plan additionally included the disbandment of Ecuadorian parliament and the organization of snap elections. The conspirators, however, were dispersed by the defenders of the legitimate president and failed to clear Gutierrez’s access to TV. Besides, the Indian organizations from the PACHAKUTIK group chose not to partake. The coup therefore collapsed.

Currently Ecuador is under emergency rule. Correa plans to purge the country’s law enforcement agencies and to find out who – including the army officers – was involved. Charges are already being pressed against Gutierrez and his Sociedad Patriotica.

Causes of the unrest in Ecuador and the steps necessary to prevent the recurrence of coups in Latin America were analyzed during the UNASUR emergency meeting which convened in Buenos Aires on October 1. Attention should be paid to the fact that Washington chose not to condemn the perpetrators of the coup in Ecuador.

+++++++++++++++++++++

related content:


  1. 121265-51x46.jpg Coup d’état continues in Ecuador
    Chaos broke out in Ecuador when members of the nation’s military and national police forces turned to violence to protest a new law that reduces their pay and benefits.
    The coup d’état has not ended and it has not failed, argued author and lawyer Eva Golinger, who is in Caracas, Venezuela.…
  2. Ecuador: A third US sponsored coup d’etat against a member state of the Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas (ALBA)
    UPDATE: 4:30pm, Police forces involved in coup in Ecuador against President Rafael Correa are violently repressing the people in the streets of Quito attempting to rescue President Correa, who remains sequestered by coup forces. Governments throughout Latin America have condemned the coup in Ecuador, but the US State Department merely said Washington was “monitoring the situation in Ecuador”.…

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ecuador's President Says CIA is Using Drug Profits to Destabilize His Country. Get back to us when you have more status than obscure blogger yourself . Correa himself says so.

_The subversive activity targeting president Correa is coordinated by Heather Hodges who was appointed as the US ambassador to Ecuador in August, 2008.She did a job in Guatemala during the reign of its bloody dictator Rios Montt and served as deputy director of the US State Department’s Cuban division which is known to be tightly interwoven with the CIA. Mrs. Hodges also worked with USAID in several countries and served as the US ambassador to Moldova where her mission was to alienate the country’s leadership from Russia and to organize a color revolution with the help of pro-western NGOs and the energetic youths from the US Peace Corps. At the moment her trainees are employed by the CIA stations in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador.

related link

http://www.bbc.co.uk...merica-12979967

ALSO SEE http://wlcentral.org/book/export/html/2693 (very good)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HOW CIA OPERATES THROUGH NON GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES

http://educationforu...showtopic=19489

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ecuador's President Says CIA is Using Drug Profits to Destabilize His Country. Get back to us when you have more status than obscure blogger yourself . Correa himself says so.

LOL as I'm sure you are well aware blaming an external enemy is an age old tactic of leaders trying to divert attention from and/or find excuses for internal problems. In any case Correa was simply repeating the claims of the wife beater and his lying underling. As for me you're right about my status, which is why unlike most of the kooks you cite I provide evidence to back my claims.

_The subversive activity targeting president Correa is coordinated by Heather Hodges who was appointed as the US ambassador to Ecuador in August, 2008.She did a job in Guatemala during the reign of its bloody dictator Rios Montt and served as deputy director of the US State Department’s Cuban division which is known to be tightly interwoven with the CIA. Mrs. Hodges also worked with USAID in several countries and served as the US ambassador to Moldova where her mission was to alienate the country’s leadership from Russia and to organize a color revolution with the help of pro-western NGOs and the energetic youths from the US Peace Corps. At the moment her trainees are employed by the CIA stations in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador.

related link

http://www.bbc.co.uk...merica-12979967

As I said before, "The author is obscure the text doesn't support the claim in the title and there were no citations to support the claims made in the text." Hodges barely even overlapped with Mott. It also unlikely The Ecuadoran government suspected what your kook claims she continued to serve over 6 months after the 2010 crisis but was asked to leave the day after the cable was released by Wikileaks. Also Ecuador's Foreign Minister said his government did NOT believe Obama was involved, though he it was possible "grupos de poder que hay en los Estados Unidos" were involved.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.noticias24.com/actualidad/noticia/175144/ecuador&prev=/search%3Fq%3D%2522-obama-no-estuvo-detras%2522%26hl%3Den%26tbo%3Dd&sa=X&ei=bGCeUKOEFI660QGr7YCYCQ&ved=0CDcQ7gEwAA

http://moldova.usembassy.gov/ambassador_hodges.html

ALSO SEE http://wlcentral.org...xport/html/2693 (very good)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Zero citations

HOW CIA OPERATES THROUGH NON GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES

http://educationforu...showtopic=19489

Been there, done that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lefty Obama ?

Police State North America: The U.S.-Canada Integrated Cybersecurity Agenda

By Dana Gabriel

Global Research, November 13, 2012

Be Your Own Leader

------------------------------------------------------------------------

As part of the Beyond the Border initiative, the U.S. and Canada are strengthening cybersecurity cooperation. In a move that received little attention, both countries recently announced a joint cybersecurity action plan. Cyber threats know no national borders which has made the issue an important security concern. A fully integrated North American security perimeter would be entrusted with preventing and responding to any such attacks.

One of the key priorities identified in the November 2011 Beyond the Border Action Plan is cybersecurity. The agreement lays the framework for enhancing U.S.-Canada, “bilateral cyber-security cooperation to better protect vital government and critical digital infrastructure and increase both countries’ ability to respond jointly and effectively to cyber incidents. This will be achieved through joint projects and operational efforts, including joint briefings with the private sector and other stakeholders, and the enhancement of real-time information sharing between operation centres.” The deal will also works towards strengthening, “cooperation on international cyber-security and Internet governance issues to promote prosperity, enhance security and preserve openness in our networked world.” Merging cyber threat strategies would force Canada to further bring its security practices in line with American ones and under the reach of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

On October 26, Public Safety Canada and the DHS released a Cybersecurity Action Plan which represents a key commitment under the Beyond the Border agreement. A press release explained that the specific goals include, “enhancing collaboration on cyber incident management between each country’s cyber security operations centres, improving information sharing and engagement with the private sector, and continuing the ongoing collaboration between Canada and the U.S. on the promotion of cyber security awareness to the public.” The new joint action plan promotes a shared approach to cybersecurity and digital critical infrastructure protection. Building on these initiatives, both countries also seek to further integrate cyber capabilities into military command structures.

Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta authorized the creation of the Joint Cyber Center (JCC) run by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and U.S. Northern Command. The JCC will bring together personnel from the intelligence, operations and command control systems divisions. The aim is, “To better integrate cyber into the headquarters missions by improving situational awareness in the cyber domain, improving the defense of the commands’ networks and providing cyber consequence response and recovery support to civil authorities.” In June, DefenseNews reported that Secretary Panetta, “approved a new organizational framework, a plan designed as a ‘first step’ towards standardized cyber operations.” This includes having a JCC at each geographic combatant command which is part of ongoing efforts to not only boost U.S., but continental cyber defense capabilities. In the near future, the U.S. and Canada could create a binational “cyber-NORAD” to protect North America from shared threats.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) released an updated Policy on Cyber Defence in June 2011. According to NATO’s website, “This revised policy offers a coordinated approach to cyber defence across the Alliance with a focus on preventing cyber attacks and building resilience.” It will act as the framework, “for how NATO will assist Allies, upon request, in their own cyber defence efforts, with the aim to optimise information sharing and situational awareness, collaboration and secure interoperability.” The new policy also, “sets the principles on NATO’s cyber defence cooperation with partner countries, international organisations, the private sector and academia.” In May of this year, the Chicago Summit Declaration, “committed to provide the resources and complete the necessary reforms to bring all NATO bodies under centralised cyber protection.” It also pledged to, “further integrate cyber defence measures into Alliance structures and procedures.” U.S.-Canadian military cooperation also extends through NATO and this includes in the realm of cybersecurity.

There are reports that President Barack Obama may be close to issuing a cybersecurity executive order as a means of bypassing Congress. Under the guise of cybersecurity, the U.S. and Canada have been individually pushing draconian legislation domestically which would grant government agencies sweeping new powers. The implications would be far reaching and pose a risk to privacy and civil liberties. Through the Beyond the Border initiative both countries are pursuing an integrated cybersecurity agenda. As they move forward and address common threats to North America, cyber and perimeter security will be further defined and dominated by U.S. interests.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, security, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com. Visit his blog at Be Your Own Leader

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The author provided no evidence for his claim:

“There are reports that President Barack Obama may be close to issuing a cybersecurity executive order as a means of bypassing Congress. Under the guise of cybersecurity, the U.S. and Canada have been individually pushing draconian legislation domestically which would grant government agencies sweeping new powers. The implications would be far reaching and pose a risk to privacy and civil liberties.”

There were various legitimate privacy concerns regarding SOPA and similar cyber security projects, but what is objectionable about the above? See if you can answer with your own words without resorting to insults.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only Colby objects to ahead of the curve analysis.

http://www.heritage....ernment-control

"Ahead of the curve analysis" must be Gaalish for 'claims made without evidence.'

The latest essay he posted is long on speculation and all but devoid of solid facts, he failed to explain how these messures would threaten privacy. The author has an interesting bio. he is a long time associate of the Far-right Heritage Foundation and "served as deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security and as acting assistant secretary for international affairs. In four years at DHS [2005 -9 (Len)], he developed policy, strategic plans and global approaches to homeland security, ranging from immigration and border security to avian flu and international rules for data protection."* LOL pot, kettle black. His primary objection presumably is that Obama and Reid are Democrats.

* http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/r/paul-rosenzweig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far-right Heritage Foundation // END Colby

##################################################

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU .....OBAMA CARE IS A RE-HASH

of a Heritage Foundation Plan of years ago.

LEFTY OBAMA ? COLBY AGREES , NO !!!!!!!!

#############

NIST TO OVERSEE OUR PRIVACY INVASION ...all comes full circle ,NO ??

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Obama Secret Directive Gives Cyber-Control to Military For National Security

obama-libya-1e407753eabc262c1-1024x676-300x198.jpg

Susanne Posel, Contributor

Activist Post

Google is stating in their most recent Transparency Report that the US government has stepped up their surveillance on civilians. According to the Internet giant, more personal data is being profiled on Americans and their habits on the Web.

Dorothy Chou, senior policy analyst at Google explains: [G]overnment demands for user data have increased steadily since we first launched the Transparency Report.”

Google says that they have been refusing to comply with governmental requests to take down content on the Internet because of fake court orders that appear to be frivolous or illegitimate.

Using the claim that content being removed is racist in nature or defaming of public figures, governments around the world are requesting that the Internet be censored. However, this new trend is indicative of the Big brother controls being enacted against the free speech of citizens in sovereign nations. France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK have topped the list of countries that seek to control content on the Internet.

Back in May, it was made public that the <a href="http://ca.news.yahoo.com/us-spy-agency-keep-mum-google-ties-court-195145311.html">relationship between the National Security Agency (NSA) and Google is not going to be disclosed.

A US Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, ruled last week that the NSA does not need to confirm nor deny (known as a “Glomar” response) its collaborations with Google; how the two work together to spy on American citizens in the name of protecting the public from “cyber-attacks”.

The court’s ruling states effectively that regardless of a filing by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) with the Freedom of Information Act to obtain documents as to the relationship, the US government does not have to divulge any arrangement between the NSA and the search engine giant.

It is now being reported that Obama has signed a secret policy directive that gives the military complete control over the Internet should the US come under a cyberattack. Being called Presidential Policy Directive 20, the alleged document (being classified) is a guideline that explains how specific federal agencies will be empowered by the Obama administration to intercept online “breaches of security” – including hacking and other digital attacks.

This document assures that the US government is taking the offensive and proactive approach to digital security where network defense is recognized as operations designed to ensure defense of national security. Whether it means shutting down main servers or local computers that have been identified as targets, a complete shutdown of Internet access (although it requires cybersecurity legislation) would not be out of the realm of possibility.

The military’s role in cybersecurity with regard to digital attacks will be to ensure that US digital information, data, and privacy be protected. This new responsibility will work in conjunction with law enforcement network defenses that are being used to para-militarize the Web using cyber units.

In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Microsoft have collaborated to create pre-crime and counterterrorism technology to aid federal intelligence and local law enforcement agencies domestic and international.

The Domain Awareness System (DAS) will be a very sophisticated software technology that aggregates and analyzes public information in real time that will produce comprehensive reports to be used by NYPD to ascertain potential threats and pre-crime activity.

Last month the leaked version of Obama’s cybersecurity executive order is a compromise by the administration offered to those concerned about Big Brother controls invading US citizen’s privacy on the Web. One concession outlined is the sharing of Internet traffic information by the US government and private sector corporations involving critical infrastructure and electrical grid. Social media companies would not be held under the same mandate.

The DHS, specifically Secretary Janet Napolitano, will be given the sole power of oversight, rather than Keith Alexander, director of the National Security Agency (NSA). Napolitano will be empowered to reference top-secret intelligence reports only known to her to base identification of cyberthreats and individual targets.

In a proactive move, Janet Napolitano, in her blog entitled “Inspiring the Next Generation of Cyber Professionals”, would like future generations to learn about cybersecurity so that their contribution to the federal government is secure to “ensure their professional development.” The collaboration of the Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Agency will support “the nation’s educational infrastructure by supporting Centers of Academic Excellence” to make sure that the “scope of cyber education” becomes an important function for those in the field as inspired by the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education (NICE).

NICE is meant to “establish an operational, sustainable and continually improving cybersecurity education program for the nation to use sound cyber practices that will enhance the nation’s security.” The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) oversee NICE by providing information and leverage to encourage the development of citizens to become “responsible” when using the Internet.

DHS has begun an initiative to purvey propaganda onto American citizens called Stop.Think.Connect. (STC). The STC have teamed with Microsoft to create public service announcements (PSAs) that convince average Americans how to perceive the inflated threat hackers have on the US government’s cybersecurity.

Some of the founders of the STC initiative are AT&T, Costco, Experian, Facebook, Google, Intel, McAfee, Mircosoft, Paypal, Symantec, Verisign, Visa, Walmart, and Yahoo!.

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism.

Edited by Steven Gaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...