“Issued on March 18, 1953, the “Statement of Policy by the National Security Council” outlined the primary threat posed to American interests in Latin America:
“There is a trend in Latin America toward nationalistic regimes maintained in large part by appeals to the masses of the population. Concurrently, there is an increasing popular demand for immediate improvement in the low living standards of the masses, with the result that most Latin American governments are under intense domestic political pressures to increase production and to diversify their economies… [Thus, a] realistic and constructive approach to this need which recognizes the importance of bettering conditions for the general population, is essential to arrest the drift in the area toward radical and nationalistic regimes. The growth of nationalism is facilitated by historic anti-U.S. prejudices and exploited by Communists [emphasis added].
“Thus, the true threat – far from the “strategic sham” of Cold War rhetoric (as Zbigniew Brzezinski referred to it) – was the actualized and very realistic challenge to American domination posed by “nationalistic regimes” which support “the masses of the population” of various Latin American countries. Worse still, the masses were demanding “immediate improvement in [their] low living standards,” thus threatening the traditional elite-dominated system of control and subordination which had been established in Latin America for so many centuries. These “radical and nationalistic regimes” had to be prevented from meeting the demands of the masses. Almost as an afterthought, the document stated that – by the way – these “radical and nationalistic regimes” are given strength “by historic anti-U.S. prejudices and exploited by Communists,” as if to simply brush over the immediate imperial threat with the common rhetoric. The use of the word “prejudices” also portends to portray such views of the United States as unwarranted and unjustified, as if the United States were the victim. Indeed, for the strategists in the National Security Council, the threat of radical nationalism had the potential to victimize them of their vast imperial domains.”
“American interests”? I don’t think so, unless the majority of americans are interested in making the world safe for sweat shops which compete for american jobs. Clearly, we need to stop using the occupiers’ terminology. These are wall street interests being served, has nothing to do with american interests, although american taxes and potentially american troops are at stake. The USA is being raped.
American taxpayers are funding their own mass deception.
“The Department of Defense Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace (PDF) claims that “Hackers and foreign governments are increasingly able to launch sophisticated intrusions into the networks and systems that control critical civilian infrastructure.”
“Yet, Wired correctly points out that “Despite mainstream news accounts, there’s been no documented hacking attacks on U.S. infrastructure designed to cripple it. A recent report from a post-9/11 intelligence fusion center that a water pump in Illinois had been destroyed by Russian hackers turned out to be baseless.”
“If we’ve learned one thing from the recent past, the U.S. government doesn’t need real evidence or a real enemy to wage war. So what can we expect from this new authorization for the Pentagon to wage offensive war on the Internet?”
“Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF, said the escalating crisis now needed to be addressed as “collectively as possible” … The European financial crisis is “escalating” and is so serious that it is unlikely to be solved by eurozone countries alone, the head of the International Monetary Fund warned Thursday night. British taxpayers are now likely to be involved in an internationally co-ordinated bail-out led by the International Monetary Fund [IMF] for countries in the single currency. Christine Lagarde, the managing director of the IMF, said the escalating crisis now needed to be addressed as “collectively as possible”. Without action, the world faces the spectre of a 1930s-style depression, she said.”
“If you’re wondering why we have the most severe inequality of wealth in American history; if you’re wondering why we currently have an all-time record number of Americans living in poverty, while we have all-time record profits and bonuses on Wall Street, it is primarily the result of the richest members of society being able to manipulate and control the legislative process through a system of legalized political bribery.”
But “Despite the fact that Congress was supposed to be out of session until the end of January, the Judiciary Committee has just announced plans to come back to continue the markup this coming Wednesday. This is rather unusual and totally unnecessary. But it shows just how desperate Hollywood is to pass this bill as quickly as possible, before the momentum of opposition builds up even further.”
Those who remember wall street’s policies in latin america in the past 4 decades should not be surprised. What’s surprising is how easily the “alternative” media was distracted from covering the US puppeteering of the egyptian uprising. The O admin knew a rebellion was brewing, the agenda was to steer it into impotence. So now the hopes of the egyptian people are being violently dashed on the rocks of realpolitics.