Incurable Imperialism: Aiming At China U.S., UK Launch Ethnic Guerilla War On Myanmar

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



By Bernhard, Editor of Moon of Alabama




If you wonder what is happening in Myanmar there is no need to look further than these maps.

China needs oil but its sea main supply route through the Strait of Malacca is vulnerable.

Pipelines through Pakistan and Myanmar provide for alternative routes.


The pipe, road and rail lines through Myanmar are not only in China's best interest but also a great chance for Myanmar to further develop. They are in its national interest.

The U.S. and its allies are hostile to China. Threatening to cut its oil supplies is probably the most powerful tool in their box. Any alternative supply routes for China make this tool less powerful. The idea then is to prevent the possible use of these routes.

Since its foundation after World War II Myanmar was ruled, sometimes more sometimes less brutally, by its anti-colonial military.

The first U.S. plan to gain control over Myanmar was to install a 'democratic government' (sic) that would do its bidding. In 2010, under pressure of U.S. instigated color revolutions, the military conceded to allow a civilian government but kept much of its constitutional and economic power. In 2016 the U.S. preferred candidate Suu Kyi, the daughter of the former military leader and Father of the Nation Aung San, was installed at the head of a new government.

The cynical empire has been leaning on identity politics imagery for decades. In case after case of regime change with the proper cosmetics, it chooses as its champions prominent women of the local bourgeoisie. In the Philippines it was Corazon Aquino; in Nicaragua Victoria Chamorro. In Myanmar Aung San Suu Kyi. And so it goes.


But Aung San Suu Kyi turned out to be a nationalist and soon failed in the eyes of the U.S. regime changers. She was as friendly with China as the military and was equally aggressive against Myanmar's many ethnic minorities. Her eventual fall out with the military was not over those issues. The military owns key industries in Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi, and the 'civil society' people behind her, wanted a place at that trough.

Elections in 2020, which excluded voting in many ethnic regions, brought overwhelming support for Aung San Suu Kyi. This alarmed the military as it feared that its main source of income would soon be endangered. On February 1 it launched a coup and put Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest.

This brought a new chance for the U.S. to intervene. It immediately re-activated the 77 'civil society' organizations in Myanmar which it is financing through the CIA offshoot National Endowment for Democracy. Protests were launched together with attacks on Chinese companies and property.

As I described it at at that time:

So this is evidently a color revolution effort against the military.

What is irritating with it is the speed with which it took off. Color revs usually require years of group building and leadership preparation. They need monetary and communication support as well as political directions from 'advisors' in 'western' embassies. Here it took only ten days to launch it.

In 2005 the Bush administration cultivated the Myanmar 'civil society' and Suu Kyi, who was then under house arrest. It popped up in the 'Saffron color revolution' in 2007 and with Cyclone Nargis in 2008 when the Bush administration tried to use Responsibility to Protect (R2P) nonsense to get a military foot on the ground.

But that all is a long time ago and after Suu Kyi had come to power there was no necessity to keep those efforts alive.

Then again - under Myanmar's 2008 constitution the military was still effectively in charge. Together with Suu Kyi's large win in the latest election there may have been an long planned 'western' attempt underway to finally unseat the military from its privileged position and to pull the country out of China's orbit.

But the chance for that eventually to happen is practically zero. Some 70% of Myanmar's population lives in rural areas. The protests occur only in the three big cities Yangon, Mandalay and Naypyitaw and are relatively small. The military is ruthless and will have no trouble to take the protesters down.

Whoever launched this nonsense should be held responsible for endangering those people.

As I predicted the protests, and the strikes the color revolution apparatus induced in the form of a Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), have since petered out:

Although Thiha didn’t want to abandon CDM, he also didn’t want to lose his job amid a tanking economy. After weighing it up for a few days, he decided to get back to work.

“I have a loan from a microfinance company that I need to repay and a family to support – a wife and a five-year-old daughter,” he said. “It wouldn’t be easy for me to get another job, particularly as I’d have to change my career.”

There were just a handful of staff present when he turned up at his branch on April 20, but the number grew each day; by the April 29 deadline, about 80 percent had returned, although they were not yet wearing their KBZ uniforms.

It’s a scene being repeated around the country, as tens of thousands of striking bank workers slowly get back to work.

This U.S. induced color revolution attempt against the military coup has failed.

Now it is time for plan B - the Syria model: "If we can't have it we will destroy it!"

A major Burmese ethnic rebel group has claimed to have shot down a helicopter belonging to the country’s military. The incident comes amid continuing protests against the recent coup that ousted Myanmar’s civilian government.

The Kachin Independence Army (KIA) said the helicopter had been shot down on Monday in Myanmar’s northernmost province of Kachin. The aircraft is said to have been destroyed after Myanmar’s military launched airstrikes against the rebels.
...
Footage circulating online shows the helicopter – likely a Mi-17 transport-assault aircraft – sustaining an apparent hit from a portable anti-aircraft missile launcher.

The Kachin (red) in the north east and the Karen (orange) in the south east have a long history of fighting against the Burman (dark violet) majority and for autonomy within Myanmar. During World War II Burma's National Army under Aung San fought on the side of Japan to kick the colonial power Britain out of Burma. Britain, which at that time also controlled India, used the Kachin and Karen to wage a guerilla war against Japan's Burmese proxy forces.


Under the great Quad project to fight China those old ties have now been reactivated. Former Indian ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar explains the project:

[T]he operative part hidden from view concentrated on the creation of a “government-in-exile” (a National Unity Government.) Alongside, Britain’s MI6 sought to bring together Myanmar’s main ethnic separatist guerrilla groups, encouraging them to take advantage of the chaos to open a second front.

Indeed, some degree of proximity has since developed between the Burman protesters in Yangon and Mandalay on one side and the non-Burman minority ethnic groups on the other side. Despite a history of mutual antipathy, they have a convergence today to bleed the military. It is an improbable coalition of Buddhists and Christians, but as an American analyst cautiously assesses, it is doable:
...
At any rate, by mid-April, the first major armed attack on the military took place by the Karen National Union, Myanmar’s oldest rebel group (which was originally created by the British colonial power as its proxy.) Such attacks have since become commonplace.

Today, the so-called National Unity Government announced its intention to establish a Federal Union Army — a military force of defectors from the security forces, rebel ethnic groups and volunteers. This would be a watershed transforming the anti-military agitation to an armed confrontation with the military. Myanmar is entering the crucial stage where Syria stood in 2011.

The Man Portable Air Defense (Manpad) missile used by the Kachin against a Myanmar army helicopter did not come out of nowhere.

It must have come from the MI6 or CIA through Myanmar's wide open borders with Quad member India. (Fielding provisions for the Karen near the Thai border are likely more complicate as the Thai military is itself under U.S. color revolution pressure and would not like to help with such efforts.)

There are more ethnic groups on both sides of the Indian border that can and will be used to wage a guerrilla war against Myanmar's military. With free supplies of modern weapons available to them they can create significant damage.

Meanwhile the Juan Guaido like exile 'National Unity Government' will be used to pretend that there is real opposition to the military government. The 'Federal Union Army' will be a copy of the 'Syrian National Army' - a loose assembly of mercenaries and diverse warlord groups. 'White Helmets' like propaganda organization will likely also soon appear.

The hope is to ignite a wide ranging civil war that will make any Chinese projects in Myanmar impossible to implement.

Bhadrakumar finds that the project is well coordinated:

The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke with his Indian counterpart S. Jaishankar not less than three times in as many months since the military takeover in Myanmar. To be sure, India’s cooperation is crucial for the success of the Anglo-American enterprise in Myanmar.

Myanmar figured prominently at the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting in London on May 3-5. Jaishankar travelled to London and met with Blinken. Neither side divulged details, but a Deutsche-Welle report flagged that “China was at the top of the agenda as the G7 foreign ministers discussed a range of human rights issues. Addressing the Myanmar coup and Russian aggression was also on the docket.”

It added that the G7 ministers watched a video from Myanmar’s National Unity Government  to “update the ministers with the current situation on the ground.” The joint communiqueissued after the London meeting devotes much attention to Myanmar (paras 21-24). It expresses “solidarity” with the National Unity Government and issues call for comprehensive sanctions against the Myanmar military, including an arms embargo.

The birth pangs of insurgencies are never open to public view, as intelligence agencies get the actors into play. The Myanmar situation has reached that point. This is the first big bash of post-Brexit UK (“Global Britain”) on the world stage. As so often in modern history, London will lead from the rear.

Countermoves to the U.S. and UK plans will come from Russia and China. A week before the coup Russia's Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu had visited Myanmar. On March 27 Russia's deputy defense minister Alexander Fomin was present at the annual Armed Forces Day parade in Naypyidaw.

Russia has oil interests in Myanmar and sells weapons to its military. It is preventing any measures against Myanmar at the UN Security Council. In a sign that it knows what's at stake it has warned that sanctions against the military could lead to a full blown civil war.

China has so far stayed quiet on the issue. It will try to keep a low profile. Any open Chinese intervention is out of question but Chinese help may become important if or when Myanmar's government comes under financial stress.

It is sad to see that another little country, which wants nothing but to be left alone, will soon get destroyed in the 'western' attempt to keep China down. A proxy war between great powers no one but already rich people will benefit from.

Posted by b on May 6, 2021 at 16:44 UTC | Permalink


 

SELECT COMMENTS

One might say the attempt to use Afghanistan as the primary area to deter China's development has failed and thus Myanmar becomes the second choice, but that's much harder since the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals don't control Myanmar's government or military, or have the sort of physical presence as in Afghanistan. Thailand as mentioned also has issues. The Cold War against Chinese and South East Asian development has now commenced. India had better watch out for it is ripe for similar destabilization.

Posted by: karlof1 | May 6 2021 17:31 utc | 3

jesus b, but i think you are correct here.. "It is sad to see that another little country, which wants nothing but to be left alone, will soon get destroyed in a proxy war between great powers." it is all about proxy wars with these freaks and there can be no peace with maniacs in power... thanks for the overview..

Posted by: james | May 6 2021 17:34 utc | 4

@karlof1 - india with modi, lol... what's not to like about that for a neocon??

Posted by: james | May 6 2021 17:35 utc | 5

China may be quiet on the public stage but don't expect them to sit idly by. 

@karlof1 #3: The US Navy have recently pissed off India with their FoN bullshit. I'm a little surprised on why. I guess Modi didn't do what DC wanted him to do.

Posted by: Ian2 | May 6 2021 17:38 utc | 6

There is a gaping hole in your analysis which is China has been the privileged partner of the KIA for years, going as far as arming them. All their weapons are chinese. This is verifiable.
As for Suu Kyi, she is the best thing that ever happened to China since they NEVER had a good relationship with the junta.
You can even go find the junta asking the US to counterbalance Chinese influence back in 08 and 10-11. All on wikileaks.

I can tell you read the Grayzone article and I'm sorry to say that unlike most of their reports this is very poorly sourced and written by a person which never reported about the region previously.

This is a lot more complicated than you paint it.

Posted by: Loic | May 6 2021 18:09 utc | 8

2 SITREPs on a single day! Bernhard, you are on fire!

M.K. Bhadrakumar blog post yesterday was really great, a must-read. Your SITREP adds even additional analytical depth.
And yes, the road ahead is sadly clear. Seems the Anglo-Saxon neocons and libs can't live a single day without regime changing.
Like locusts, they migrate from one state they failed onto the next. 101st time's the charm they must think..

Posted by: DontBelieveEitherPr. | May 6 2021 18:16 utc | 9

 

 

 

 

 


Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It's super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin.  Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Our main image motif: Painted by famed Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, Glorious Victory is a critical and condemnatory view of the 1954 CIA coup of Guatemala’s democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. The United States removed Árbenz from power and replaced him with a dictatorial military commander because Árbenz threatened the landholdings of the United Fruit Company with his agrarian reform laws.


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]


The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post



All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

black-horizontal

 

black-horizontal




What are the real reasons behind the New Cold War?

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



by William I. Robinson
ROARMAG.ORG




  • May 6, 2021
CAPITALISM & CRISIS

The US is launching a New Cold War against Russia and China in an attempt to deflect our attention from the escalating crisis of global capitalism. 

US Navy patrolling the Pacific Ocean.  Since Obama declared America's "pivot to Asia" the Pentagon has been concentrating forces and staging more provocations in China's natural sphere of influence. Having lost the political and economic edge, the empire is attempting to obstruct and intimidate its opponents.

 

The announcement on April 15 by President Biden that this administration was expelling 10 Kremlin diplomats and imposingnew sanctions for alleged Russian interference in the 2020 US elections — to which Russia replied with a tit for tat — came just days after the Pentagon conducted military drills in the South China Sea. These actions were but the latest escalation of aggressive posturing as Washington ramps up its “New Cold War” against Russia and China, pushing the world dangerously towards international political and military conflagration.

Most observers attribute this US-instigated war to rivalry and competition over hegemony and international economic control. These factors are important, but there is a bigger picture that has been largely overlooked of what is driving this process: the crisis of global capitalism.

This crisis is economic, or structural. One of chronic stagnation in the global economy. But it is also political: a crisis of state legitimacy and capitalist hegemony. The system is moving towards what we call “a general crisis of capitalist rule” as billions of people around the world face uncertain struggles for survival and question a system they no longer see as legitimate.


Military expenditures can keep the US economy from tanking outright but cannot prevent an eventual collapse due to its deeply ingrained structural contradictions, nor can "military muscle" guarantee US hegemony indefinitely. A multipolar world is now inevitable.

In the United States, the ruling groups must channel fear over tenuous survival away from the system and towards scapegoated communities, such as immigrants or Asians blamed for the pandemic, and towards external enemies such as China and Russia. At the same time, rising international tensions legitimate expanding military and security budgets and open up new opportunities for profit making through war, political conflict and repression in the face of stagnation in the civilian economy.

All around the world a “people’s spring” has taken off. From Chile to Lebanon, Iraq to India, France to the United States, Haiti to Nigeria and South Africa to Colombia, waves of strikes and mass protests have proliferated and, in many instances, appear to be acquiring a radical anti-capitalist character. The ruling groups cannot but be frightened by the rumbling from below. If left unchallenged, the New Cold War will become a cornerstone in the arsenal of US rulers and transnational elites to maintain a grip on power as the crisis deepens.

THE CRISIS OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM

Economically, global capitalism faces what is known in technical language as “overaccumulation”: a situation in which the economy has produced — or has the capacity to produce — great quantities of wealth but the market cannot absorb this wealth because of escalating inequality. Capitalism by its very nature will produce abundant wealth yet polarize that wealth and generate ever greater levels of social inequality unless offset by redistributive policies. The level of global social polarization and inequality now experienced is without precedent. In 2018, the richest one percent of humanity controlled more than half of the world’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent had to make do with just five percent.

Such inequalities end up undermining the stability of the system as the gap grows between what is — or could be — produced and what the market can absorb. The extreme concentration of the planet’s wealth in the hands of the few and the accelerated impoverishment and dispossession of the majority means that the transnational capitalist class, or TCC, has increasing difficulty in finding productive outlets to unload enormous amounts of surplus it accumulated.

The more global inequalities expand, the more constricted the world market becomes and the more the system faces a structural crisis of overaccumulation. If left unchecked, expanding social polarization results in crisis — in stagnation, recessions, depressions, social upheavals and war — just what we are experiencing right now.

Contrary to mainstream accounts, the coronavirus pandemic did not cause the crisis of global capitalism, for this was already upon us. On the eve of the pandemic, growth in the EU countries had already shrunk to zero, much of Latin America and sub-Sahara Africa was in recession, growth rates in Asia were steadily declining, and North America faced a slowdown. The writing was on the wall. The contagion was but the spark that ignited the combustible of a global economy that never fully recovered from the 2008 financial collapse and had been teetering on the brink of renewed crisis ever since.

Even if there is a momentary recovery as the world slowly emerges from the pandemic, global capitalism will remain mired in this structural crisis of overaccumulation. In the years leading up to the pandemic there was a steady rise in underutilized capacity and a slowdown in industrial production around the world. The surplus of accumulated capital with nowhere to go expanded rapidly. Transnational corporations recorded record profits during the 2010s at the same time that corporate investment declined.

The total cash held in reserves of the world’s 2,000 biggest non-financial corporations increased from $6.6 trillion in 2010 to $14.2 trillion in 2020 — considerably more than the foreign exchange reserves of the world’s central governments — as the global economy stagnated. Wild financial speculation and mounting government corporate, and consumer debt drove growth in the first two decades of the 21st century, but these are temporary and unsustainable solutions to long-term stagnation.

THE GLOBAL WAR ECONOMY

As I showed in my 2020 book, The Global Police State, the global economy has become ever more dependent on the development and deployment of systems of warfare, social control and repression simply as a means of making profit and continuing to accumulate capital in the face of chronic stagnation and saturation of global markets. This is known as “militarized accumulation” and refers to a situation in which a global war economy relies on perpetual state organized war making, social control and repression — driven now by new digital technologies — in order to sustain the process of capital accumulation.

The events of September 11, 2001 marked the start of an era of a permanent global war in which logistics, warfare, intelligence, repression, surveillance and even military personnel are more and more the privatized domain of transnational capital. The Pentagon budget increased 91 percent in real terms between 1998 and 2011, while worldwide, total state military budgets outlays grew by 50 percent from 2006 to 2015, from $1.4 trillion to more than $2 trillion, although this figure did not take into account the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on intelligence, contingency operations, policing, bogus wars against immigrants, terrorism and drugs, and “homeland security.” During this time, military-industrial complex profits quadrupled.

But focusing just on state military budgets only gives us a part of the picture of the global war economy. The various wars, conflicts and campaigns of social control and repression around the world involve the fusion of private accumulation with state militarization. In this relationship, the state facilitates the expansion of opportunities for private capital to accumulate through militarization, such as by facilitating global weapons sales by military-industrial-security firms, the amounts of which have reached unprecedented levels. Global weapons sales by the top 100 weapons manufacturers and military service companies increased by 38 percent between 2002 and 2016.

By 2018, private for-profit military companies employed some 15 million people around the world, while another 20 million people worked in private security worldwide. The private security (policing) business is one of the fastest growing economic sectors in many countries and has come to dwarf public security around the world. The amount spent on private security in 2003, the year of the invasion of Iraq, was 73 percent higher than that spent in the public sphere, and three times as many persons were employed in private forces as in official law enforcement agencies. In half of the world’s countries, private security agents outnumber police officers.

These corporate soldiers and police were deployed to guard corporate property, provide personal security for TCC executives and their families, collect data, conduct police, paramilitary, counterinsurgency and surveillance operations, carry out mass crowd control and repression of protesters, run private detention and interrogation facilities, manage prisons and participate in outright warfare.

In 2018, President Trump announced with much fanfare the creation of a sixth military service, the “space force.” The corporate media duly towed the official line that this force was needed to face expanding threats to the United States. What went less reported is that a small group of former government officials with deep ties to the aerospace industry had pushed behind the scenes for its creation as a way to hype military spending on satellites and other space systems.

In February of this year, the Federation of American Scientists reported that military-industrial complex lobbying is responsible for the decision by the US government to invest at least $100 billion to beef up its nuclear stockpile. The Biden administration announced in early April to much acclaim that it would pull all US troops out of Afghanistan. While US service troops in that country number 2,500, these pale in comparison with the more than 18,000 contractorsthat US government has hired to do its bidding in the country, including at least 5,000 corporate soldiers that will remain.

The so-called wars on drugs and terrorism, the undeclared wars on immigrants, refugees and gangs — and poor, dark-skinned and working-class youth more generally — the construction of border walls, immigrant detention centers, prison-industrial complexes, systems of mass surveillance and the spread of private security guard and mercenary companies, have all become major sources of profit-making and they will become more important to the system as stagnation becomes the new normal. In sum, the global police state is big business at a time when other opportunities for transnational corporate profit-making are limited.

But if corporate profit, and not an external threat, is the reason for expanding the US state and corporate war machine and the global police state, this must still be justified to the public. The official state propaganda narrative about the “New Cold War” serves this purpose.

CONJURING UP EXTERNAL ENEMIES

There is another dynamic at work in explaining the New Cold War: the crisis of state legitimacy and capitalist hegemony. International tensions derive from the acute political contradiction in global capitalism in which economic globalization takes places within a nation-state-based system of political authority. To put this in technical terms, there is a contradiction between the accumulation function and the legitimacy function of states. That is, states face a contradiction between the need to promote transnational capital accumulation in their individual national territories and their need to achieve political legitimacy and stabilize the domestic social order.

Attracting transnational corporate and financial investments to the national territory requires providing capital with all the incentives associated with neoliberalism, such as downward pressure on wages, union busting, deregulation, low or no taxes, privatization, investment subsidies, fiscal austerity and on so. The result is rising inequality, impoverishment and insecurity for working and popular classes; precisely the conditions that throw states into crises of legitimacy, destabilize national political systems and jeopardize elite control.

International frictions escalate as states, in their efforts to retain legitimacy, seek to sublimate social and political tensions and to keep the social order from fracturing. In the US, this sublimation has involved channeling social unrest towards scapegoated communities such as immigrants — this is one key function of racism and was a core component of the Trump government’s political strategy — or towards an external enemy such as China or Russia, which is clearly becoming a cornerstone of the Biden government’s strategy.

While the Chinese and Russian ruling classes must also face the economic and political fallout of global crisis, their national economies are less dependent on militarized accumulation and their mechanisms of legitimization rest elsewhere — not on conflict with the US. It is Washington that is conjuring up the New Cold War, based not on any political or military threat from China and Russia, much less from economic competition, as US- and Chinese-based transnational corporations are deeply cross-invested, but on the imperative of managing and sublimating the crisis.

The drive by the capitalist state to externalize the political fallout of the crisis increases the danger that international tensions will lead to war. Historically wars have pulled the capitalist system out of crisis while they serve to deflect attention from political tensions and problems of legitimacy. The so-called “peace dividend” that was to result in demilitarization when the original Cold War ended with the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union evaporated almost overnight with the events of September 2001, which legitimated the sham “War on Terror” as a new pretext for militarization and reactionary nationalism. US presidents historically reach their highest approval ratings when they launch wars. George W. Bush reached an all-time-high of 90 percent in 2001 as his administration geared up to invade Afghanistan, and his father George H. W. Bush achieved an 89 percent approval rating in 1991, right as the US declared the end of its (first) invasion of Iraq and the “liberation of Kuwait.”

THE BATTLE FOR THE POST-PANDEMIC WORLD

We are currently witnessing a radical restructuring and transformation of global capitalism based on a much more advanced digitalization of the entire global economy and society. This process is driven by so-called fourth industrial revolution technologies, including artificial intelligence and machine learning, Big Data, autonomously driven land, air and sea vehicles, quantum and cloud computing, 5G bandwidth, bio- and nanotechnology and the Internet of Things, or IoT.

The crisis is not only economic and political, but also existential because of the threats of ecological collapse and nuclear war, to which we must add the danger of future pandemics that may involve much deadlier microbes than coronaviruses. The pandemic lockdowns served as dry runs for how digitalization may allow the dominant groups to step up restructuring time and space and to exercise greater control over the global working class. The system is now pushing towards expansion through militarization, wars and conflicts, through a new round of violent dispossession and through further plunder of the state.

The ruling classes are also using the health emergency to legitimate tighter control over restive populations. The changing social and economic conditions brought about by the pandemic and its aftermath are accelerating the process. These conditions have helped a new bloc of transnational capital, led by the giant tech companies, interwoven as they are with finance, pharmaceuticals and the military-industrial complex, to amass ever greater power and to consolidate its control over the commanding heights of the global economy. As restructuring proceeds, it heightens the concentration of capital worldwide, worsens social inequality and also aggravates international tensions and the dangers of military conflagration.

In 2018, just seventeen global financial conglomerates collectively managed $41.1 trillion dollars — more than half the GDP of the entire planet. That same year, to reiterate, the richest one percent of humanity led by 36 million millionaires and 2,400 billionaires controlled more than half of the world’s wealth while the bottom 80 percent — nearly six billion people — had to make do with just five percent of this wealth. The result is devastation for the poor majority of humanity.

Worldwide, 50 percent of all people live on less than $2.50 a day and a full 80 percent live on less than $10 per day. One in three people on the planet suffer from some form of malnutrition, nearly a billion go to bed hungry each night and another two billion suffer from food insecurity. Refugees from war, climate change, political repression and economic collapse already number into the hundreds of millions. The New Cold War will further immiserate this mass of humanity.

Capitalist crises are times of intense social and class struggles. There has been a rapid political polarization in global society since 2008 between an insurgent far-right and an insurgent left. The ongoing crisis has incited popular revolts. Workers, farmers and poor people have engaged in a wave of strikes and protests around the world. From Sudan to Chile, France to Thailand, South Africa to the United States, a “people’s spring” is breaking out everywhere. But the crisis also animates far-right and neofascist forces that have surged in many countries around the world and that sought to capitalize politically on the health calamity and its aftermath. Neofascist movements and authoritarian and dictatorial regimes have proliferated around the world as democracy breaks down.

Such savage inequalities are explosive. They fuel mass protest by the oppressed and lead the ruling groups to deploy an ever more omnipresent global police state to contain the rebellion of the global working and popular classes. Global capitalism is emerging from the pandemic in a dangerous new phase. The contradictions of this crisis-ridden system have reached the breaking point, placing the world into a perilous situation that borders on global civil war.

The stakes could not be higher. The battle for the post-pandemic world is now being waged. Part of that battle is to expose the New Cold War as a ruse by the dominant groups to deflect our attention from the escalating crisis of global capitalism.


William I. Robinson

William I. Robinson is Distinguished Professor of Sociology, Global Studies and Latin American Studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara. His book, Global Civil War: Repression and Rebellion in the Post-Pandemic World, will be released by PM Press early next year.

 


Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It's super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin.  Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Our main image motif: Painted by famed Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, Glorious Victory is a critical and condemnatory view of the 1954 CIA coup of Guatemala’s democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. The United States removed Árbenz from power and replaced him with a dictatorial military commander because Árbenz threatened the landholdings of the United Fruit Company with his agrarian reform laws.


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]


The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post



All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

black-horizontal

 

black-horizontal




The CIA Goes Woke and the World Laughs & Pukes

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



ANNOTATED BY PATRICE GREANVILLE




Hilarious CIA "Woke" Recruitment Video



5 May 2021
Listen closely to this CIA marketing message: It proves that Satan can seduce anyone, not just dumb privileged white Americans, but also equally brainless Latinas. 


Woke CIA? Are you kidding? In this episode Jimmy, Ron Placone and Stef Zamorano comment on the sheer absurdity if not downright imbecility apparently penetrating even the sociopathic CIA, as it turns to recruit self-defined "progressives", but maybe it is just one more opportunistic, perhaps brilliant move by an organization that in many ways helped to spawn a cultural shift toward postmodernist identitarian insanity. All to bury any understanding by the masses of the need to wage a politics of unity, world peace, and class struggle. 

Even Tucker Carlson at Fox News is laughing at this ad:

Incidentally, since the woman in this CIA package uses deliberate "woke" lingo, like "intersectional", "cisgender", and "imposter syndrome," all of which sound like the whinings of a well-heeled egotist, I doubt that many "regular" people will fully understand on first pass what she's talking about. So below we have supplied a couple of definitions to help you along. As well, we have added to this post two solid analyses of this new phenomenon, by sober-minded leftists. (See our addendum). And we're also including some excellent comments from Jimmy's original thread. Some are certainly totally spot on. Consider this sampler:


The irony that this woman’s parents probably moved to the US because of CIA backed coup somewhere in Latin America is somehow lost to them...(Rebeca Lucia)


"Command your space, you are worth it." What a great social attitude, I so enjoy interacting with people like that. (Kariakas)


I for one feel much better knowing that our Drone Assassination programs will be conducted by Woke Intersectional LatinX with anxiety issues. It matters!  (Todd Smith)


CIA using identity politics to get a pass at the havoc they wreak. Real shocker!  (TheClamHammer )


She got under my skin in so many ways. In your face self-love sure doesn't generate admirers where I live. (John Burns)


And this one, aptly summing up the jaw-dropping lack of self-awareness of people —a generation of moral zombies—who believe themselves to be in the vanguard of wokeness:



THE "IN" LEXICON

Imposter syndrome is loosely defined as doubting your abilities and feeling like a fraud. It disproportionately affects high-achieving people, who find it difficult to accept their accomplishments. Many question whether they're deserving of accolades.


A cisgender person (sometimes cissexual, informally abbreviated cis) is a person whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth. For example, someone who identifies as a woman and was identified as female at birth is a cisgender woman. The word cisgender is the antonym of transgender.


Addendum
CIA Embraces Left-Wing Ideology, Leftists Deny That This Is Happening

by Michael Tracey
MT

In a mind-blowing marketing video first published on March 25, but which had escaped widespread notice until recent days, the CIA enthusiastically endorsed several key tenets of what has now indisputably become a hegemonic left/liberal ideological and rhetorical construct: 

I am a woman of color,” the video’s protagonist, an unnamed CIA officer, triumphantly proclaims. “I am a cisgender millennial who’s been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise.”


THE HUMAN FACE OF THE CIA
The protagonist of this video is apparently of Ecuadorian descent. This looks and sounds like a smooth sendup of the CIA and the political identity warriors on SNL or The Onion, but it is real, which makes it no laughing matter. A bit sinister, in fact. 

She continues, “I used to struggle with imposter syndrome. But at 36, I refuse to internalize misguided patriarchal ideas of what a woman can or should be. I am tired of feeling like I’m supposed to apologize for the space I occupy.”

The video is a quick tour de force of the tropes and quirks most closely associated with contemporary “Woke Ideology,” such as: 

  • A direct reference to “intersectionality” doctrine — arguably the ideology’s core operating premise, taken to mean that a broad range of identity-based oppressions “intersect” and must be overturned
  • Invocation of the term “cisgender,” which is intended to signify the CIA’s inclusiveness of non-gender normative people, i.e. Trans
  • A denunciation of “patriarchy,” one of the most abhorred identity-based systems of oppression
  • Weird pride in one’s self-reported diagnosis of mental illness, as though it’s just another identity trait to be advertised and embraced, rather than a debilitating ailment to be cured
  • The now-ubiquitous use of the noun “space” in reference not to any physical location, but rather to the vague metaphysical force one purportedly brings to bear in life... or something like that. (“Know your worth. Command your space,” the woman further adds)

Humans of New York social media craze, wherein ordinary citizens are “humanized” with schmaltzy and touchingly relatable stories. Just as the CIA has at least attempted to do with this series.

Another “Humans of the CIA” video features a man narrating his Journey™ with the following quote: “Growing up gay in a small Southern town, I was lucky to have a wonderful and accepting family. I always struggled with the idea that I might not be able to discuss my personal life at work. Imagine my surprise when I was taking my oath at CIA, and I noticed a rainbow on then-director Brennan’s lanyard.”



“Inclusion is a core value here,” the man who Grew Up Gay continues. “Officers from the top down work hard to ensure that every single person — whatever their gender, gender identity, race, disability, or sexual orientation — can bring their entire self to work every day.”

John Brennan, the former CIA Director under Barack Obama (and a main character in the CIA-generated Trump/Russia saga) happens to feature in both of these videos as a man who seeks to ensure that CIA agents can “bring their entire self to work every day,” as opposed to only part of their selves, like just a few limbs. There he is, smiling alongside the Latina Woman as a symbol of CIA leadership’s commitment to equity and inclusion. Also making a cameo appearance is one of Brennan’s successors, Gina Haspel, whose appointment was heralded by the Trump Administration as a victory for “women’s empowerment.” Clearly, there’s nothing partisan about the Agency’s newfound passionate devotion to these identity-related values!

Though it’s possible that the CIA marketing department’s zeal to adopt this lingo intensified with the onset of a new Democratic administration, the PR scheme appears to have predated the inauguration of Joe Biden. On January 4, 2021, a video was posted in which another unnamed agent touts his experience as a “chief of corporate strategy and education for diversity and inclusion” as wonderful preparation for a career in the CIA.

One struggles to imagine Donald Trump personally authorizing such a marketing campaign (although, who knows). Either way, the CIA’s role in left/liberal political activism reached a certain crescendo under the presidency of Trump. Brennan was personally integral in launching the narrative that Trump had “colluded” with the Russian government in order to subvert American democracy, and this narrative became an object of furious fixation on the liberal/left — in part due to Brennan’s constant agitation on Twitter and his perch in corporate media:

(For anyone who denies that segments of “the left” were invested in the Trump/Russia narrative, please take a look at the organizations which sponsored rallies in defense of Special Counsel Robert Mueller throughout 2017 and 2018. They include the Working Families Party, Progressive Democrats of America, People for the American Way, Indivisible, and others. It wasn’t just wishy-washy “liberals” or “centrists” doing this.)

So, the CIA’s latest rhetorical overture could be understood as a continuation of the trend whereby the CIA’s prerogatives increasingly align with the prerogatives of the foundation-funded left/liberal nonprofit complex and activist class. Perhaps not coincidentally, former (or “former”) CIA agents comprised a significant share of Democrats’ incoming freshmen when the Party won control of the House of Representatives in 2018.

Whenever they are confronted with the reality that their rhetorical stylings are being aped across the entire country’s power centers, now including the Intelligence Community, left-wing activists and journalists tend to angrily disclaim any culpability. The CIA’s decision to institutionally pronounce itself a wellspring of “intersectionality,” they’ll insist, is all fake and cynical co-optation.

However, this isn’t so much a “co-optation” as it is a natural evolution of Woke Ideology’s imperatives. The CIA can easily adopt something approximating an “intersectional” attitude toward racial, gender, gender identity-related oppressions and continue on with its ordinary mission. In fact, the adoption of this rhetoric could enhance its mission by strengthening its domestic cultural cachet. Say John Brennan is a true believer in intersectionality doctrine — which definitely is not out of the question — and truly believes the CIA can help carry out its goals. What then?

Asserting some discontinuity between these concepts’ newfound universal popularity and left-wing activism makes no sense. Is there any more potent left-wing belief in circulation at the moment than that of “intersectional” oppressions, and their all-pervasive, defining influence on American life? All the CIA is doing is signaling its eagerness to partake in the ideological project of dismantling these alleged oppressions. In a way, this is a true victory for the Activist Left — the potency of whose beliefs are gaining purchase at a spellbinding pace, probably never more rapidly than in the past year.

But instead of interrogating why it is that the rhetorical and ideological paradigm they’ve relentlessly promoted fits so easily within the country’s most powerful institutions, from Wall Street banks to the Big Tech monopolies to the CIA, left-wing activists and journalists will often petulantly change the subject. After I commented on the “Woke CIA” video yesterday via Twitter, hardcore radical Rage Against the Machine frontman Tom Morello came out of nowhere to accuse me of denying the “evils” of past CIA actions — such as assassinations and coups — and acting like the “real problem” with the CIA is their sudden practice of distributing so-called “woke pamphlets.”

I’m reading a very illuminating book right now (not a pamphlet) that details numerous largely-forgotten brutal CIA transgressions, such as a covert 1958 mission which resulted in the bombing of a market and a church on Ambon Island, Indonesia, obliterating civilians. Anyone unfamiliar with this and other chapters in CIA history should “educate” themselves, and perhaps that will help them understand what the boldly subversive left-wing guitar player evidently doesn’t — which is that “Woke Ideology” is perfectly compatible with the CIA’s institutional prerogative to further entrench its own power.

That history makes it doubly absurd for liberals (and, albeit more tacitly, leftists) to have been so tolerant of CIA interventions into domestic political affairs because their short-term political objectives (disabling and ousting Trump) happened to align. Now, they seem angrier with those who point out the self-evident absurdity of this CIA marketing tactic than with the tactic itself. Maybe that’s because they’ve been prime movers in creating the political conditions under which adopting such tactics is considered shrewd.

(Last summer Morello professed himself a huge fan of Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility, one of the worst books ever written and a main source of the insane “anti-racist” precepts being adopted across corporate America. So that gives some insight into where he’s coming from.)

Liberals and leftists have to constantly run around disclaiming that their beliefs, aesthetics, and speech codes have become hegemonic because posturing as beleaguered, noble outsiders is fundamental to their self-conception. As one Twitter commenter put it to me, “My view is that the CIA has looked at the beliefs of those coming out of elite schools and decided this is how they have to pitch to them.” Well... yeah.

Many don’t find it interesting or worthy of comment that ideological prescriptions and rhetorical formulations once largely relegated to Tumblr and obscure academic circles have migrated to the highest levels of the US intelligence apparatus within a matter of years. They should feel free to keep screeching into the void online, while others attempt to critically evaluate this culture-upheaving phenomenon.

MUST READ: WHO PAID THE PIPER? THE CIA AND THE CULTURAL COLD WAR

Comments Moon of Alabama—

CIA Wokeness

Michael Tracey writes about a weird CIA video that is making the rounds (emphasis added):

In a mind-blowing marketing video first published on March 25, but which had escaped widespread notice until recent days, the CIA enthusiastically endorsed several key tenets of what has now indisputably become a hegemonic left/liberal ideological and rhetorical construct:

I am a woman of color,” the video’s protagonist, an unnamed CIA officer, triumphantly proclaims. “I am a cisgender millennial who’s been diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder. I am intersectional, but my existence is not a box-checking exercise.”

She continues, “I used to struggle with imposter syndrome. But at 36, I refuse to internalize misguided patriarchal ideas of what a woman can or should be. I am tired of feeling like I’m supposed to apologize for the space I occupy.”

I have to admit that I do not know what the words in bold are supposed to mean. (Nor does my Firefox spellchecker. It flags them.)

I also do not understand the italicized phrases.

To me they sound like utter bullshit.

But if the CIA wants to hire more such people I am all for it. Folks who can not leave their personal issues at the door typically muck up their workplace and create productivity problems.

A less effective CIA will be a plus for the rest of the world. 

Posted by b at 13:55 UTC | Comments (175)
 
Some of MoA's comments are also worth reading:

Oh! You definitely should learn that NewSpeak. Yes, it's ridiculous, knowing this babble hasn't any intrinsic value. It is , however, the current ruling ideology of the USA and by extension the broader West. It's like understanding the babble of some obscure theoretician or the basic terminology of some remote religion. You can safely ignore all of this as nonsense - as long as such people don't run a country!

Posted by: m | May 5 2021 14:13 utc | 1

Like b suggests: never stop/prevent the enemy (which is what CIA is, for most people) from making a mistake. The sooner they replace their cadre with woke idiots the better for humanity and the chances of our survival.

Posted by: Idiocrates | May 5 2021 14:20 utc | 2

Yeah this video took a nice beating on The Hedge....frikkin hilarious! Over 50% of The Company's light lifting is subbed out to contractors, and most of the Langley smurfs are busy "analyzing" data, soooo desk jockey much? It would be fun to track where the diversity hires actually go, but hey I've got a garden to build!

Posted by: Chevrus | May 5 2021 14:23 utc | 3

Utter bullshit indeed. Listing all the boxes she checks and then adding "my existence is not a box-checking exercise" is comical in itself. Hopefully, b is right and the CIA will be less effective for the inclusion of people like her.

Posted by: MarkU | May 5 2021 14:28 utc | 4

"Generalized anxiety disorder" is what people who have a poor working relationship with reality often suffer from. The anxiety arises from the divergence of what they believe the world to be from what they perceive about the world with their senses. It is a permanent state of cognitive dissonance. The "woke" believe that the cure for this disorder is to create "safe spaces" where exposure to elements of the real world that trigger the cognitive dissonance can be banned and canceled. It is an undeclared goal of the "woke" to extend these "safe space" reality exclusion zones to encompass the entire planet.

Remember the "Havana Syndrome", where CIA spooks under diplomatic cover at various US embassies, but mainly the one in Cuba, developed psychogenic illnesses because they were convinced that they were being zapped by Soviet mind rays? This is the result of taking individuals who already suffer from emotional and psychological damage like the cisgender millennial in the linked CIA advertisement and placing them in postings where they are absolutely convinced that they are completely surrounded by hostile enemies. Their delusion and paranoia feed off each other. Then, for the first time they hear crickets unlike anything they ever experienced in their gated, manicured, bug-sprayed northern Virginia wealthy suburbs and their already fractured mind shatters the rest of the way.

New York Langley Times, the WashingtonBezos Post, the CIA News Network and such have been going off the rails with their absurd narratives these last several years.

Posted by: William Gruff | May 5 2021 14:50 utc | 5

Actually the agency is a perfect place for someone who needs safe spaces, willingly engages in mind replacement, and blindly believes all of their co-workers share the same dogmatic hysteria through which they justify their Karen-ness. I hope they let them run some ops in dark areas.

Posted by: Stumpy | May 5 2021 14:52 utc | 6

all I heard in that video is "me", not "we".

Posted by: jonst | May 5 2021 14:53 utc | 7

Yeah, that has to be one of the most hare-brained Psyop fails ever. The US is a world leader alright, in mental retardation and lack of self-awareness.

Identity politics and wokeness meets imperialism. Makes you wonder how much longer they can unironically continue calling themselves 'intelligence' agencies.

Consistent with other brilliant 'Born in the USA', ideologically spawned own goals, like bank deregulation, privatising the military, legalising bribes in politics, incentivising every idiot to own a gun, de-industrialising and outsourcing production in China, and the inevitable coup de grace in waiting, leveraging the Dollar's status as reserve currency to impose sanctions... because... exceptionalism and indispensability are just eternal, universally accepted virtues apparently.

If learning from mistakes makes us wiser, one can expect more than a few Buddhas of sorts to emerge from the US in a generation or 3. Would not want to be there in the time between though, it's bound to be a rough ride.

Posted by: Et Tu | May 5 2021 14:58 utc | 10

 


Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It's super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin.  Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Our main image motif: Painted by famed Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, Glorious Victory is a critical and condemnatory view of the 1954 CIA coup of Guatemala’s democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. The United States removed Árbenz from power and replaced him with a dictatorial military commander because Árbenz threatened the landholdings of the United Fruit Company with his agrarian reform laws.


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]


The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post



All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

black-horizontal

 

black-horizontal




Latest Congressional Betrayal: US’ New “Foreign Malign Influence” Center Is Just Official Cover for American Intelligence Interference in Domestic Politics

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



Scott Ritter




***

The Director of National Intelligence has ostensibly created a new “center” for the sharing and analysis of information and intelligence about foreign interference in US elections. Its real focus is much more nefarious.


The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) announced in a statement on Monday that it was creating a new intelligence “center”focused on tracking so-called “foreign malign influence,” reported Politico.  This new entity, known as the Foreign Malign Influence Center, was mandated in the recent intelligence and defense budget authorization acts, representing the reality that the impetus for its creation came from Congress, and not the intelligence community.


Pentagon boss Lloyd J. Austin III with the new Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, her gender supposedly signaling social progress. With their Covid masks on, they look ridiculous, but their intended role as careerist servants of the global oligarchy is actually sinister.


For example, the most recent defense expenditure authorization required that the ODNI establish a “social media data analysis center” to coordinate and track foreign social media influence operations by analyzing data voluntarily shared by US social media companies. Based upon this analysis, the ODNI would report to Congress on a quarterly basis on trends in foreign influence and disinformation operations to the public. As envisioned by Congress, the intelligence community would determine jointly with US social media companies which data and metadata will be made available for analysis.

In short, the intelligence community, using data obtained from the social media accounts of American citizens, will report to Congress how this data influences the political decision making of these same American citizens.

If this does not make the most ardent defender of the US Constitution ill, nothing will.

THESE CONSTANT AND GROWING ABUSES ARE INFURIATING, BUT NO USE COMPLAINING TO YOUR CONGRESSPERSON AS THEY ARE ALL IN ON THIS RACKET.
Ordinary Americans have no real representation in the US Congress. 

It is not as if the US intelligence community wasn’t trending in this direction on its own volition. The straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak, was the publication in March 2021 of an intelligence community assessment entitled ‘Foreign Threats to the US 2020 Presidential Election’. In this document, the US intelligence community assessed that “Russian President Putin authorized, and a range of Russian government organizations conducted, influence operations aimed at denigrating President Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party, supporting former President Trump, undermining public confidence in the electoral process, and exacerbating sociopolitical divisions in the US.”

But the most damning portion of this assessment came when it delved into the specific methodology employed by Russia to achieve these nefarious aims.

Throughout the election cycle”, the assessment declared, “Russia’s online influence actors sought to affect US public perceptions of the candidates, as well as advance Moscow’s long standing goals of undermining confidence in US election processes and increasing sociopolitical divisions among the American people. During the presidential primaries and dating back to 2019, these actors backed candidates from both major US political parties that Moscow viewed as outsiders, while later claiming that election fraud helped what they called ‘establishment’ candidates. Throughout the election, Russia’s online influence actors sought to amplify mistrust in the electoral process by denigrating mail-in ballots, highlighting alleged irregularities, and accusing the Democratic Party of voter fraud.

As an American citizen who is politically engaged, I read the intelligence community assessment with a combination of interest, concern, and outrage. The notion of “Russian online influence actors” affecting “US public perceptions of the candidates” is as intellectually vacuous as it is factually unsustainable. The stupidity encapsulated by such analysis can only be excused by the fact that the intelligence community assessment is a document produced more for the benefit of domestic political consumption than a genuine effort at identifying and quantifying legitimate threats to the US.

Let's not play dumb: by definition the ruling oligarchy has no interest in strengthening or defending US democracy.

The assessment itself is short on hard data. However, the House Intelligence Committee has documented some 3,000 social media ads bought by Russian “troll farms” between 2015-2017, at a cost of some $100,000. These ads were in addition to so-called “organic posts,” some 80,000 of which were published on US social media, free of charge, by alleged Russian “bots” resulting in 126 million “views” by Americans. These ads were crude, unfocused, and simply inane in terms of their content.

To put the alleged Russian influence campaign into perspective, one need only reflect on the fact that during his short bid for the Democratic nomination, Michael Bloomberg spent nearly $1 billion underwriting the single most sophisticated public relations campaign, including hundreds of millions of targeted social media ads put together by the most brilliant political minds money could buy. All this money, time and effort, however, could not change the reality that, to the American public, Michael Bloomberg was an unattractive candidate – in the end his $1 billion bought him exactly two delegates.

The fact is, the political opinions of most American citizens are formed based upon a lifetime of exposure to issues that matter for them the most, whether it be education, right-to-life, gun control, social justice, agriculture, energy, environment, law enforcement, or any other of the multitude of sources of causation that impact the day-to-day existence of the American electorate.

Some of these beliefs are inherited, such as the working-class attachment to unions. Some are driven by current affairs, such as the growing awareness of climate change. But all are derived from the life experience of each American, and the thought that these deeply held beliefs could be bought, changed, or otherwise manipulated by social media posts published by foreign actors, malign or otherwise, is deeply insulting to me, and should be to every other American as well.

The irony is that by creating an intelligence organization whose task it is to help prevent the political Balkanization of America by analyzing the social media accounts of Americans who hold differing political beliefs than “the establishment” the newly minted Foreign Malign Influence Center ostensibly serves, the resulting process will only cause the further political division of the United States.

Some 74 million Americans voted for a candidate, Donald Trump, who has promulgated the very issues that the Democratic-controlled Congress seeks to denigrate and suppress through the work of this new intelligence center. These ideas will not simply disappear because the Democrats in Congress have empowered a “center” within the intelligence community whose sole function is to demonize any political thought that does not conform with the powers that be.

As it is currently focused, the Foreign Malign Influence Center is the living, breathing embodiment of politicized intelligence, two words which, when put together, represent the death knell for any intelligence organization. Worse, the work it will be doing, when turned over to a Democratically controlled Congress desperate to undermine the political viability of those 74 million American citizens, will only further fracture an already divided nation.

The Foreign Malign Influence Center was specifically mandated to examine the social media influence campaigns operated by Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. It is particularly telling that they were not directed to investigate the two largest foreign sources of political influence in America today, namely the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee and the Murdoch media empire. President Putin could only dream about being able to buy congressional seats the way AIPAC does, or control what information becomes magnified (and, by extension, suppressed) by the newspapers, television and radio enterprises owned by Rupert Murdoch.

These are the true villains when it comes to foreign corruption of American politics. These foreigners, however, have a seat at the establishment table. Their malign influence will never be labeled as such, and they will never have to withstand the ignominy of having their work scrutinized under the politicized microscope of an intelligence community that has allowed itself to be corrupted by domestic American politics to the point that it no longer serves the American people as a whole, but only a select class of American persons.

*

AVRIL HAINES sordid career inside the empire's intel bureaucracies can be examined on her Wikipedia page

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ‘SCORPION KING: America’s Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.’ He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It's super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin.  Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Our main image motif: Painted by famed Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, Glorious Victory is a critical and condemnatory view of the 1954 CIA coup of Guatemala’s democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. The United States removed Árbenz from power and replaced him with a dictatorial military commander because Árbenz threatened the landholdings of the United Fruit Company with his agrarian reform laws.


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]


The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post



All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

black-horizontal

 

black-horizontal




Corporate News Outlets Again “Confirm” the Same False Story, While Many Refuse to Correct it

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.



Glenn Greenwald
SUBSTACK.COM




DEGENERATE JOURNALISM—
Journalists with major outlets know they spread a false, retracted story about the FBI and Giuliani but refuse to remove it, because their real job is spreading disinformation.


Rudy Giuliani appeared before the Michigan House Oversight Committee in Lansing, Michigan on December 2, 2020 (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY / AFP) (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY/AFP via Getty Images)

Rudy Giuliani appeared before the Michigan House Oversight Committee in Lansing, Michigan on December 2, 2020 (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY / AFP) (Photo by JEFF KOWALSKY/AFP via Getty Images)


One of the primary plagues of corporate journalism, which I have documented more times than I can count, just reared its ugly head again to deceive millions of people with fake news. When one large news outlet publishes a false story based on whispers from anonymous security state agents with the CIA or FBI, other news outlets quickly purport that they have “independently confirmed” the false story, in order to bolster its credibility (oh, it must be true since other outlets have also confirmed it).

This is an obvious scam — they have not “independently confirmed” anything but rather merely acted as servants to the same lying security state agents who planted the original false story — but they do it over and over, creating the deceitful perception that a fake story has been "confirmed” by multiple outlets, thus bolstering its credibility in the public mind. It was the favored tactic for spreading debunked Russiagate frauds and is still used. One of the most vivid examples occurred in December, 2017, when CNN falsely reported what it hyped as "a major bombshell”: that Donald Trump, Jr. had advance access to the WikiLeaks archive. Within an hour, NBC News’ Ken Dilanian and CBS News both claimed they had “independently confirmed” this fairy tale. When it turned out that it was a complete lie, all based on a false date on an email to Trump Jr., these outlets embarrassingly corrected it hours later and then simply moved on as if it never happened, never explaining how multiple outlets could possibly have all “independently confirmed” the same blatant falsehood.

On Thursday night, The Washington Post, citing anonymous sources (of course), claimedthat the FBI gave a "defensive briefing” to Rudy Giuliani in 2019, before he traveled to Ukraine, that he was being targeted by a Russian disinformation campaign to hurt Joe Biden's candidacy, yet he ignored the FBI's warnings and went anyway. The Post also claimed that the right-wing news outlet OANN was similarly briefed. The claim about Giuliani not only predictably ricocheted all over social media and cable news — where, as usual, it was uncritically treated as Truth — but it was shortly thereafter “independently confirmed” by both NBC Newsde facto CIA spokesman Ken Dilanian along with The New York Times.

What was the problem with this story? It was totally false. The FBI never briefed Giuliani on any such thing. As a result, The Washington Post had to append this "correction” — meaning a retraction — to the top of its viral story:

The Washington Post, May 1, 2021

At first, The New York Times attempted to quietly change the story to delete the false claims without noting they were doing so. But upon being pressured, they finally faced up to what they did and posted their own retraction at the very bottom of the story that reads: “Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated whether Rudolph W. Giuliani received a formal warning from the F.B.I. about Russian disinformation. Mr. Giuliani did not receive such a so-called defensive briefing.” In their self-glorifying jargon, the Paper of Record did not spread Fake News — perish the thought — but merely "misstated” the truth. Meanwhile, NBC News, at the top of its false story, posted this explanation for why Dilanian got the story completely wrong:

An earlier version of this article included an incorrect report that Rudolph Giuliani had received a defensive briefing from the FBI in 2019 warning him that he was being targeted by a Russian influence operation. The report was based on a source familiar with the matter, but a second source now says the briefing was only prepared for Giuliani and not delivered to him, in part over concerns it might complicate the criminal investigation of Giuliani. As a result, the premise and headline of the article below have been changed to reflect the corrected information.

This credibility carnage was so glaring that even CNN acknowledged that “the corrections are black eyes to the newsrooms which have aggressively reported on Giuliani's contacts with Ukrainians in his attempts to dig up dirt on then-presidential candidate Joe Biden.” But there have been so many similar "black eyes” like this one, indeed far worse ones, over the last five years, and they never change anything that causes these "black eyes” because they want to do this: spreading disinformation is their function. Indeed, as I have asked almost every time these debacles happen: how is it possible that these same outlets keep "confirming” one another's false stories?

And the answer is obvious: they all serve as mouthpieces for the same propagandists and disinformation agents of the CIA, FBI and other security state agencies. In this capacity, they dutifully write down and vouch for what they are told by those agencies to publish without any investigative scrutiny or confirmation. The most amazing part of it all is that when they try to malign independent journalists for not doing "real reporting” — real reporting like these corporate outlets do — this is what they mean by real reporting: getting a call from the CIA or FBI and being told what to say. And that is why they so often mislead and deceive the public with blatant disinformation in unison.

It is hard to overstate how far and wide this false story about the FBI's briefing to Giuliani spread, how many millions of people it deceived. The two liberal cable outlets, MSNBC and CNN, instantly convened panels to analyze the grave implications of this revelation, accusing Giuliani of knowingly spreading Russian disinformation (by which they meant, as usual, truthful information that reflects poorly on Democratic Party leaders) even though he was told not to keep doing so by the FBI.

As usual, the MSNBC program of Nicolle Wallace — who has magically transformed from a disinformation agent for the Bush/Cheney White House into an identical disinformation agent but now for the DNC — was one of the leaders in spreading this lie. She brought on former FBI agent and current MSNBC analyst Clint Watts to do just that (just as Wallace dramatized how Brian Sicknick died by falsely claiming that "they beat a Capitol Police Officer to death with a fire extinguisher" and repeatedly glorified Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) as a great and truthful leader on COVID):

This is all par for the course. But in this case, dozens of journalists for NBC News, MSNBC, CNN and The Washington Post — the very outlets that purported to "confirm” the false story — as well as activists and scholars who purport to combat "disinformation,” spread it all over Twitter and, days later, have left it up, even knowing the story is false, while not even telling their followers that the story was false and has been retracted.

In preparation for writing this article, I spent the day notifying close to a dozen of these media luminaries that their false tweet remained up and asked whether they intend to take it down and/or correct the false tweet. Only one — NBC White House Correspondent Geoff Bennett — responded. He did so by blocking me on Twitter, while leaving the false tweet up, uncorrected. Put another way, this NBC News journalist is well aware that he lied to close to 200,000 followers when he falsely told them that “Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Ron Johnson were warned in late 2019 that they were targets of a Russian operation intended to damage Joe Biden politically” — a story (as it pertains to Giuliani) which even his own outlet has retracted — but simply refuses to note that it was false or to remove the false posting. This NBC News reporter is knowingly spreading Fake News all over Twitter.

Tweet to NBC News’ Geoff Bennett advising him that his false tweet remains up and uncorrected, followed by his immediate block.

The number of journalists with major outlets who spread this fake news and never corrected it is too high to comprehensively chronicle. But even when you tell them that the story they spread is false and that they never corrected it or deleted the false tweet, they just leave it up anyway: knowingly spreading lies.

Basically as an experiment to measure how willing they are to knowingly lie even when caught, I sent a large number of them inquiries similar to the one I sent to NBC’s Bennett. With the exception of NBC's Bennett — who blocked me but left up the lying claim — virtually all just left their false tweets up with no notation to the people they lied to that the story was retracted. Here, for instance, are my similar interactions with Washington Post reporter Dan Zak, frequent Russia analyst for CNN and The Daily BeastMichael Weiss, CNN's Senior Global Affairs analyst Bianna Golodryga, and Bloombergcolumnist Tim O'Brien, all of whom spread this story and have left it up uncorrected:

Here is just a random sampling of five more people or sites who spread this lie all over the internet and refuse to take it down or tell their followers the tweet was false: MSNBC's ex-FBI agent Clint Watts, Washington Post reporter Greg Jaffe, Center for American Progress' Max Bergmann who runs the liberal think tank's "Moscow Project,” Nina Jankowicz: who says she "studies disinformation”(!) for the Wilson Center, and the liberal "news” site Raw Story:

Meanwhile, MSNBC's Chris Hayes’ show, All In, has left up its tweet with the false story and refuses to take it down (though, after I shamed them for it, they finally notedin a subsequent tweet an hour or so ago that the story was retracted), while MSNBC's viral tweet with the false story also remains up:

Perhaps the most extraordinary example is The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler. He is held out by that paper as its official "fact-checker": the person responsible for decreeing what is true and what is false. Not only did he post the fake claim about Giuliani's briefing, and not only did he never delete it or note that it was false even after his own paper retracted it and even after I advised him of this, but — just two days ago! — he endorsed a denunciation by CNN's Jake Tapper of an RNC official who tweeted out a story that turned out to be false (namely, that DHS was providing copies of Kamala Harris’ book to migrant children).

"Says quite a bit that this tweet is still up even after the story was proven a lie,” the CNN anchor reasonably said. Yet while Kessler endorsed that lecture, he himself did exactly the same thing: let stand a retracted story without removing the tweet or telling his audience that it was false:

As I indicated, this is just a small sampling of journalists and activists who spread this false story and simply left the lie standing and uncorrected even after being advised. The list of shame also includes MSNBC's second-favorite neocon (after Bill Kristol) Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post. And while the false articles from the three outlets went viral, the tweets and other notations addressing the retractions were noted by only a tiny fraction who spread the original claim.

Every journalist, even the most honest and careful, will get things wrong sometimes, and trustworthy journalists issue prompt corrections when they do. That behavior should be trust-building. But when media outlets continue to use the same reckless and deceitful tactics — such as claiming to have “independently confirmed” one another's false stories when they have merely served as stenographers for the same anonymous security state agents while "confirming” nothing — that strongly suggests a complete indifference to the truth and, even more so, a willingness to serve as disinformation agents for various official factions. And when a journalist spreads a false story and knows they have done so, but still refuses to correct it or remove it — as is the case for many of the above examples — then they are just tawdry liars who should be driven out of journalism. But they are not driven out and will not be because the reality is that their job is to spread disinformation as long as it is in servitude to the right factions (the CIA, FBI and DNC) and against those who are ideologically disfavored.

Again we see the core truth of U.S. corporate journalism. The outlets that most vocally claim to condemn disinformation and fake news — to the point of agitating in favor of corporate and online censorship of their critics and competitors in the name of combating it — are the most prolific, aggressive and destructive disseminators of disinformation. Their refusal to remove the fake news here even after I explicitly notified them of it just makes this latest example a particularly vivid one.


Our journalism here, as well the expansion of this platform, depends exclusively on reader support in the form of subscriptions. If you wish to support our journalism, please subscribe either for yourself or as a gift to someone else.

Give a gift subscription

Glenn Greenwald, attorney, social activist, and legendary citizens' journalist par excellence is an expat living in Brazil but keeping a sharp eye on US and global developments. He is a former editor of The Intercept, an outfit he co-founded to produce totally independent journalism, but eventually had to abandon due to the corporate corruption that overran the place. 

 


Did you sign up yet for our FREE bulletin?
It's super easy! Sign up to receive our FREE bulletin.  Get TGP selections in your mailbox. No obligation of any kind. All addresses secure and never sold or commercialised. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Our main image motif: Painted by famed Mexican muralist Diego Rivera, Glorious Victory is a critical and condemnatory view of the 1954 CIA coup of Guatemala’s democratically elected president Jacobo Árbenz Guzmán. The United States removed Árbenz from power and replaced him with a dictatorial military commander because Árbenz threatened the landholdings of the United Fruit Company with his agrarian reform laws.


[premium_newsticker id="211406"]


The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post



All image captions, pull quotes, appendices, etc. by the editors not the authors. 
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK. 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

black-horizontal

 

black-horizontal