Thursday 29th of July 2021

the US assault on cuba...


















We witness that campaigns against Cuba have intensified when the blockade is harsher and the Covid-19 pandemic is being dealt with on the Island, led by a government that privileges the health of people.


The two topics falling outside the conceptual scope of promoters and actors. The former are the same as always, running the business of money that the United States allocates to counterrevolution, the latter with their dignity dragged around and without a plan for a better Cuba.

Every time the plot of each campaign is searched in media and social networks, the terrorists turned supporters of the soft coup appear, with the methods that Gene Sharp proposed and were functional for the Unconventional War of the United States Army. Examples are plenty in the post-Soviet space, and the Middle East.

Whoever follows the money trail will find what’s published by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in an exhibitionism that tends to dazzle the "gold diggers", although in silence they have the amounts allocated to espionage, known to characters like Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

Behind NED and USAID there are also think tanks that euphemistically call themselves "non-governmental" and follow the dictates of the State Department, the CIA and whatever monstrosity they deem appropriate, which with blackmail and pressure seek their operators outside and within Cuba.

This is how artists or alleged artists who must abdicate to any national sense to perform in Miami.

Culture, human rights, and attacks on the Cuban government are recurring themes used in Internet and the media dependent on Yankee money. It’s not free, the so-called non-violent methods are based on them. All that is sought in Cuba is that with the difficulties, becomes true the old idea of surrendering the Cuban people out of hunger and despair.

They have been trying for six decades. They haven’t been able. And, in the end, the campaigns carry the stench of terrorism, which is what they have left and that the Cuban people, once again, will defeat with cunning and patience. They are very concerned about the existence of a single Party that sets the course of the nation and that it’s followed by the vast majority of the Cuban people. Live to tell.

Taken from Cuba, Isla Mía

Translated by: Amilkal Labañino Valdés / Cubasí Translation Staff


Read more:


The right wing media in the US have gone ballistic about the present unrest in Cuba which for my money would have had to have been fomented by the CIA. Agents of this US org are everywhere, considering there are more than 70,000 (estimate) such "foreign" agents working to destabilise many countries' working institutions. NOTE: there are 21,575 US employees at the CIA. This does not account for "foreign" status agents... Say there are 60 major countries of concern for the US, this means that on average about 10,000 US "foreign" agents are working against established governments. The other 10,000 are split with the rest of the world and even spy on their friend of the USA... These agents can be double agents but are traitors to their countries — as we know cash is more valuable than loyalty.


In news undercurrents... we can explore how in the surface of the news, Turkey is the "enfant terrible" of NATO, while in reality, Turkey is doing NATO's dirty work... One of the main thing to consider is THAT THE US PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE NO CLUE AS TO WHAT DIRTY WORK IS BEING DONE... nor in which way it is done. He (it's a he) gets a "briefing" that "everything" is done to "protect the US's interests"— and everything is sweet — but one would have to be a trained memory wiz with an IQ of 350 to be able to absorb the real value, the depth and the complete deviousness of the ops designed for "God Bless America". 

the rules of US godot...

 What America’s seizure of websites says about the ‘rules-based’ order   

Rules are by definition things that apply universally, so it’s hard to convince the world to respect them if you consistently violate them.


Written by 


This article first appeared in the Nonzero Newsletter 


This week Peter Beinart, writing in the New York Times, took aim at one of the Blob’s favorite terms: the “rules-based order.” The Biden administration often invokes the term, typically in reference to the threat allegedly posed to that order by China. The problem, Beinart notes, is that no one ever bothers to explain what rules constitute the order—what rules America is supposedly abiding by while its adversaries violate them. “Since the ‘rules-based order’ is never adequately defined, America’s claim to uphold it can never be disproved,” Beinart writes.

This sort of skepticism about boilerplate “rules-based order” rhetoric has been growing lately, and that’s a welcome development in foreign policy discourse—maybe even a sign that the Blob’s days of hegemony are numbered. The trend dates back to the Trump administration, when observers noted that some of the Blobsters most loudly complaining about Trump’s failure to uphold the “rules-based order” had championed things like invading and bombing countries in violation of international law. When Biden took office, and staffed his foreign policy team with exactly this kind of rules-based-order scold, it was an open invitation for Beinart and other Blob critics to turn up the heat.

And yet—so much more heat is needed! The average member of the foreign policy establishment, to say nothing of the average American voter, has no idea how hypocritical America’s sermons about following the rules look from abroad. As it happens, an object lesson in this hypocrisy took shape on the same day Beinart’s piece was published, when the US Justice Department announced that it had disabled 36 Iran-linked websites. Let’s take a look at this exercise in American rules enforcement and try to imagine how it might look from perspectives other than America’s. Three kinds of rules, in particular, are implicated in the Justice Department’s website takedown:    

1. Rules against election interference. As Joshua Keating notes in Slate, the legal basis for seizing 30 of those websites was a Trump-era executive order authorizing sanctions against foreign actors that have interfered in American elections. So is one of the rules in the “rules-based order” that influencing a foreign election—with propaganda, misinformation, whatever—is forbidden? If so, America is due for a scolding. The political scientist Lindsey O’Rourke writes in his book Covert Regime Change:“Throughout the Cold War, the United States recurrently sought to influence foreign elections by covertly providing funding, advisory assistance, and propaganda to help its preferred candidates win their elections… All told, US-supported parties won their elections in twelve out of sixteen covert campaigns.”

And of course, if the “wrong” candidate wins an election, the US can always intervene after the fact. Like when it helped depose Iran’s elected leader in 1953, replacing him with a brutal dictator who ruled until the 1979 Iranian revolution, which ushered in an Islamist regime that, not surprisingly, has been able to get political mileage out of anti-American rhetoric ever since! Also not surprisingly, this regime apparently feels justified in using its websites to influence—even “interfere in”—American elections.

During the Obama administration, Biden himself was supportive of something that bore at least some resemblance to a coup against a democratically elected leader. American officials went to Ukraine, egged on protestors who wanted to oust its pro-Russian president, and meanwhile maneuvered behind the scenes to select a new head of government—who took the reins after the country’s elected president, with armed opponents roaming the streets, fled the country to ensure his survival. Apparently the Biden foreign policy team (notably including Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who was centrally involved in the Ukraine affair) doesn’t consider deposing elected presidents as serious an assault on democracy as spreading propaganda during an election.

2. Rules against terrorism. Three of the websites were taken down on grounds that they belonged to Kata’ib Hezbollah, an Iran-backed group that in 2009 was deemed a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the State Department.

Why the terrorist designation? Because the Katai’ib Hezbollah militia was part of the Iraqi insurgency and killed US troops. Of course, the troops were there because the US had violated the mother of all rules—the one against attacking countries that haven’t attacked you, the rule that, more than any other single rule, the United Nations was founded on. But let’s leave that fact aside and look at why Iran might consider it ironic that the US would deem lethal insurgents terrorists.

Didn’t the US, during the Obama administration, arm insurgents in Syria who killed lots of people, no doubt including civilians? And quite possibly including Iranian troops (who, unlike American troops in Iraq, were in Syria at the behest of the government—a fact that, however brutal the Syrian regime, still makes a big difference under international law)? 

Also: When Israel arranges to have Iranian nuclear scientists murdered, isn’t that kind of like terrorism? So shouldn’t the US sanction Israel—or, at least, signal that it doesn’t approve of such terrorist acts, just to clarify that its broader collaboration with Israel on anti-Iran measures doesn’t mean it supports rule violation?

Oh, wait! That would be awkward, since its collaboration with Israel on anti-Iran measures does mean it supports rule violation. During the Obama administration, the US and Israel together launched a cyberattack that made Iranian centrifuges spin out of control, which presumably violates some rule or other. (Unless the US wants to declare that it’s OK if Iran launches a cyberattack that makes America’scentrifuges spin out of control.)

And a technical question: When in January of 2020 the US assassinated Iran’s most important military leader, was that terrorism or was it more like an act of war? Either way, since it had no plausible justification under international law, shouldn’t presidential candidate Biden have done more than just fret that the killing would be “escalatory”? Shouldn’t he have said it threatens the “rule-based order”?

3. Suppression of speech. The question of whether free speech is one of the “rules” in the “rules based order” opens up a can of worms—questions about whether by “rules based order” you’re referring to the “liberal international order,” and, if so, which specific meaning of “liberal international order” you have in mind. But for present purposes it’s enough to say that members of the Biden team have been known to complain about censorship in places like Russia and China.

So it’s worth asking: What does it do for the credibility of these sermons when we take down a bunch of websites of foreign origin because of their content? Keating, in Slate, does a good job of assessing this question. After acknowledging that some of these websites conveyed disinformation and did other objectionable things, he concludes, “Disinformation and election interference are serious problems, but a world in which governments all reserve the right to tightly control the information that can reach their citizens from outside their borders is exactly the sort of world that governments like Russia, China, and Iran want to create.”

Note Keating’s hidden assumption: that effectively promulgating international rules means abiding by them. Rules, after all, are by definition things that apply universally, so it’s hard to convince the world to respect them if you violate them. In other words: Keating takes the word “rules” seriously. No senior figure on the Biden foreign policy team—certainly not National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan or Secretary of State Antony Blinken, both of whom love to rhapsodize about the “rules-based order”—has shown any inclination to do that.


 Read more:



See also:


the voice of god...


more crap from luke...



Free Julian Assange Now ˚¬∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆H!!!!!!

understanding cuba...


Amid power outages, food shortages, and continued fears over COVID-19, amplified by 60 years of economic strangulation by a US blockade, thousands of protestors in Cuba have taken to the streets to demand answers and action from their government. Mainstream media outlets in the US have jumped at the chance to paint these protests as singularly focused on repudiating the communist revolution, using them as a pretext for greater imperialist intervention, but the reality on the ground is much more complex. Author and historian Andrés Pertierra joins us to examine the deeper historical and political contexts surrounding the protests and to discuss how viewers outside of Cuba can navigate the media frenzy. Pertierra is a historian of Cuba and US-Cuban relations in the 19th and 20th centuries; he received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Havana and is currently a PhD student in Latin American and Caribbean history at the University of Wisconsin–Madison.


Read more:


Read from top.






Exclusive: Congressional Republicans Seek To Give Biden War Powers For Cuba



GOP leadership also included Big Tech in meetings in order to explore feasibility of providing internet access on the island.


West Virginia GOP Rep. Alex Mooney is planning to introduce a new congressional joint resolution to grant President Joe Biden the ability to use war powers to deliver humanitarian aid to Cuba amid growing unrest in the country.

Images of the resolution reviewed by The American Conservative show that “The Authorization for the Use of Military Forces Against Cuba to Ensure the Delivery of Humanitarian Aid” has three specific goals:

  1. “ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid to the people of Cuba, including but not limited to food, water, and medicine;”
  2. “create a safe zone in Cuba for the Cuban people to safely receive humanitarian aid;” and
  3. “prevent humanitarian aid from being stolen by the Cuban government or its forces.”

Mooney’s office stated, “The Congressman hasn’t introduced any legislation related to Cuba. If he does introduce legislation we’ll be happy to comment at that time. Our office doesn’t comment on hypothetical legislation.”

Congressional Republicans have also held separate, virtual, member-level meetings regarding how to respond to the protests in Cuba and have invited representatives of large corporations to them. Emails also reviewed by The American Conservative show an official from Sen. Rick Scott’s office coordinated a meeting on July 19 with members of Congress and representatives with Amazon, Facebook, Google, Verizon, and the wireless communications trade association CTIA.

Sources detailed that senators spoke to companies from Silicon Valley to see what was technically feasible as far as getting internet access into Cuba. “If the people of Cuba can see the outpouring of support they have from the United States and the world can see the atrocities happening in that country, the further we’ll be toppling that regime,” said a Senate aide.

The American Conservative reached out to Scott’s office for comment, but did not receive a response in time for this report’s publication.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy announced last week that Mooney would be among those Republicans placed on the “Leader’s Advisory Team on Cuba,” and Mooney’s office has been actively courting other Republicans to support the resolution, including Florida Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, Maria Salazar, and Sen. Marco Rubio, according to emails reviewed by The American Conservative. A source told TheAmerican Conservative that Rubio would not support Mooney’s drafted AUMF.

Those emails reveal that Diaz-Balart’s office opposed the measure, with one official writing that the Republican does “not trust the Biden Administration” because they “would only prop up the Cuban regime with this aid.” However, other communications show that Diaz-Balart planned to write the president a letter “urging him to build on [the Trump administration’s] robust policy toward Cuba and to lead a coordinated, global effort of democratic allies and multilateral organizations to stand with the Cuban people.”

Over the last week, massive protests have erupted among Cuba’s citizens over collapsing conditions brought about by the communist-controlled government. According to the Wall Street Journal, Cuba’s economy collapsed by 11 percent last year amid the coronavirus. Money brought into their economy through tourism quickly dried up as countries enacted lockdowns and travel restrictions and remittances plummeted.

Citizens are reportedly forced to wait in line for hours to buy basic commodities, such as bread and chicken, or even use public transportation. Cubans have also seen their electricity and lights shut down for hours at a time. All the while, coronavirus continues to spread.

On Thursday, the Biden administration announced that it was placing sanctions on the Cuban Minister of Defense, Alvaro Lopez Miera, and on the Cuban Ministry of the Interior. “The Cuban people are protesting for the fundamental and universal rights they deserve from their government,” said Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in a statement. “Treasury will continue to enforce its Cuba-related sanctions, including those imposed today, to support the people of Cuba in their quest for democracy and relief from the Cuban regime.”

The Biden administration said those sanctions were put in place because of the Cuban government’s moves to quash protests. In a separate statement, the president said that those sanctions are only “the beginning” of what the administration plans to do. “The United States will continue to sanction individuals responsible for oppression of the Cuban people,” he said.

The U.S. has a largely dismal record of intervening in Cuba, ranging from the failed Bay of Pigs invasion organized by the CIA to oust Fidel Castro from power, which led to heightened tensions during the Cuban missile crisis, to multiple failed CIA plots to assassinate Castro.




Ryan Girdusky is a contributing editor at The American Conservative, a host of the TAC Right Now podcast, and the author of They’re Not Listening: How The Elites Created the National Populist Revolution.


Read more:


Read from top



cardboard biden...


Listening to the pronouncements on Cuba by our cardboard President I wonder what the hell the United States is trying to do in Latin America? Biden, a lifelong hack of little mind and that going south, runs on, or his ventriloquist does, about his support for the Cuban people. He cares deeply about the Cuban people. Yes he does. So why does this malignant drab want to ruin their lives? He is placing more sanctions against the island. Is he too stupid to realize that sanctions hurt only the people, not the leaders, who can get their prime rib and good bourbon anyway? Or does he simply not care?

If there is any place on this or any other planet that poses less danger to America than Cuba, except Venezuela or maybe some undiscovered tribe in the Brazilian rainforest, I can’t imagine who. There are eleven million Cubans, and all but about five want to work, drink, play with their children, and make phenomenal music that would send the solemn horses’ asses of the thinktanks into therapy. For sixty years the goddam United States has tried to starve them, sanction them, make them as miserable as possible out of a weird sort of Nordic sadism. It is sickening.

Kamala might not stand for it. Of course, standing is not her primary talent.

What does this wind-up political toy know about Cuba? Joe presides, dimly, over a country that for over half a century has done everything it can to ensure the misery of those eleven million innocent people, doing everything it can to make their lives as hard as possible. But Joe, he of the forty-weight sincerity probably learned at Central Casting, feels for the Cuban people. Yes, he does. Where did we get this guy?

Has the sadistic muppet ever even been to Cuba? I have, years ago on a magazine assignment. I had to get permission from Treasury under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Why? The Cubans were not my enemy. They aren’t anybody’s enemy. We found them to be, to our unsurprise, friendly and hospitable people, even though we were from the country that is their chief source of misery. We—my wife and I—spent a fair few nights in a cheap outdoor restaurant on the malecón, watching the waves shatter against the breakwater with a roar and burst of spume and chatting with the clientele. Curiously, neither they nor the other people we met resembled the evil communists imagined by the First Pabulum Dispenser on Pennsylvania Avenue. On other occasions, Violeta being mildly crazy, we spent hours walking the poor sections, streets lined with buildings of an age now past falling apart from the general poverty of the island. All in all, an agreeable Latin American country but ground down by merciless American strangulation.

But, you see, it’s for democracy and human rights. America is all about human rights. Ask the Vietnamese, Cambodians, Laos, Iraqis, Syrians, Afghans, Somalis, Yeminis, Libyans, Iranians, Venezuelans.

Why does America torture Cuba? Because Washington divides countries into two categories, those that submit, and enemies. Which countries don’t lick American boots? Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and…Cuba. America does everything, and will do everything it can to crush the disobedient: embargos, sanctions, invasion, isolation from the world financial system, coups, assassination, tariffs, bombing. When vassals it calls allies, such as Europe, begin to show independence, as by allowing Nordstream II, it sanctions them as readily as it does the enemies. But, see, it isn’t to protect the Empire, to hurt anybody to any extent to remain dominant, to ruin millions upon millions of people who have no interest in politics, in order to maintain hegemony. No. It’s to overthrow dictators. Except those useful to Washington, which it frequently installs.

Is it possible that Biden believes his own twaddle? He is not a pinnacle of neuronal radiance, having finished low in his class in a mediocre law school, after being caught cheating. He appears to have little experience of the world. Yes, as VP he met a hundred world leaders in diplomatic banquets. But has he ever lived in another country? Walked its neighborhoods? Eaten in the side streets? Dated its women? Talked politics with other than the political class? Does he speak another language?

An eerie disconnect lies between America’s rulers and the America they rule, the world they live in. For example, Latin immigration is a crucial issue in America. How much time has Biden spent in, say, Mexico? In the great barrio of East LA? Race relations between black and white are a disaster. When was the last time he dined in Anacostia, Washington’s main black neighborhood? Has he ever been to Anacostia? The police, their behavior, problems, and the world in which they work, rock the country. Has Biden ever been in a police car? Has he any idea of the bad sections at three a.m., of the reality of the streets?

America is constantly at war. Has he been in a war? Seen one? Has he even been in the military?

But he torments the Cubans. For truth, justice, and the American way. Which is the problem. This is the American way.

This is not new. American government has been dropping toward the level of Belize for decades. We had the Clintons selling favors to sordid foreign governments and Bill doing chunky interns in the Offal Office when he wasn’t with Hill in Epstein’s underage ginch island. We had Bush II, who was mostly just dim, a flickering bulb in no danger of kidnapping by Mensa. Trump, a crooked real-estate hustler with the elegance of a truss ad, now under criminal investigation. At the moment we are supernally blessed with Biden with a kid deep in furtive shenanigans involving influence peddling to Ukraine. The morals of the Sinaloa cartel, the intellect of Reader’s Digest, warbling in three-part harmony about transgender rights.

Kamala is not without qualifications but, if Joe made use of them, he would be in divorce court.

The country is in the hands of Thorazine cases. Of pathologically aggressive mongooses, or mongoslings. I wouldn’t trust them to run a lemonade stand, even with supervision by their mothers much less a country bristling with overpriced weaponry that might, unexpectedly, actually work at an awkward moment.

The proportion of draft dodgers among our current martial virgins illuminates their unfamiliarity with America. Bush II, who sheltered in the National Guard. Cheney (I had other priorities). Trump, a golden crested cockatoo speaking English like a brain-damaged twelve-year-old and threatening North Korea with fire and brimstone. Pompeo, who hid in the Navy, a non-combat outfit. Bolton, with his codpiece mustache. Biden, who played football in college but developed asthma whenever in the vicinity of a draft board.

Maybe the warlike posturing of these Beltway isolates is to persuade themselves that they are of one blood with Hells Angels. I imagine all three of Trump’s fern-bar Napoleons, Bannon, Pompeo, and Bolton, sitting in a dark room in the West Wing, masturbating furiously in passionate autolubricity while reading bayonet catalogs, with Trump in the next room tirelessly watching reruns of himself on Fox News. And Biden, sending the Navy to say nya-nya-nay to the Russians in the Black Sea, bowwow, woof, grrr. pondering whether to start World War Three as a publicity stunt in time for the midterms. But none of these was going to risk his sweet ass in a war when he could send some kid from Memphis.

Look at Washington’s, now Biden’s, foreign policy. The Russians and Chinese work on a trade route over the Arctic to have a shorter route than through Suez. Biden hyperventilates, Views With Alarm, and sends warships to Confront Russia. How do you confront a trade route ? No end upset with China; Biden gets a pack of poodle countries to send warships to deter Beijing in the Indian Ocean. Deter it from what? What do they think China is going to do to the Indian Ocean? Poison it? Drain it? Now we have all sorts of poodleties driving warships around the Black Sea, to Send a Message to Russia. Why not Western Union? Gmail? Little boys saying, “Nya nya nya.” Really. They are just like teen-age gangs with their stupid turf wars.

Now we have Biden, a leftover Cold Warrior who performs the three duties essential in a President, obeying Israel, protecting Wall Street, and shoveling money into the arms industry. Joe could be done in software as a senior project at a good high school and no one would know the difference. Think of the savings. Instead of flying expensively to foreign countries, he could be emailed. But he won’t allow remittances to Cubans because he wants to starve them. What did the lady say about the banality of evil? The man, if he quite is one, makes me sick.


Write Fred at [email protected] Put the letters pdq anywhere in the subject line to avoid heartless autodeleton. All read, reply not guaranteed due to volume.


Read more:


Read from top.



mexican humanitarian wave...


President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has scoffed at the notion that Mexico should honor a US-imposed embargo on Cuba, as his country sends aid to the island in defiance of Washington’s suffocating economic restrictions.


Defending his decision to fuel shipments and other humanitarian aid to Cuba, Obrador said on Tuesday that US sanctions on the socialist state were “inhumane,” and that “independent” Mexico was well within its rights to defy the unilaterally imposed embargo. 

Earlier this week, a Mexican cargo ship loaded with 100,000 barrels of diesel fuel set sail for Cuba. The Mexican government said the fuel would be used to provide power for Cuban hospitals. 

Two additional vessels loaded with medical supplies and food embarked in the following days. Mexico’s Foreign Ministry described the shipments as humanitarian assistance aimed at helping Cuba overcome the coronavirus pandemic. 

Washington has tried to penalize ships that deliver goods to Cuba by preventing them from docking later at US ports, Obrador noted. The rule is one of the main ways the US enforces its embargo. 

The US government has ratcheted up sanctions aimed at some Cuban officials accused of human rights abuses following anti-government protests in the country earlier this month. 

Mexico isn’t the only country that has openly bypassed Washington’s economic restrictions. On Saturday, Russia sent a large shipment of food and medical supplies to the island. Cuba’s trade minister applauded the move, tweeting: “We are not alone.”


Read more:


Read from top.