|
In Cuba Another U.S. Government Abuse Of Online Communication
The Associated Press has an interesting story about another USAID project to overthrow the government of Cuba. USAID used several front companies to create a Twitter like SMS phone service in Cuba which was, after becoming popular, supposed to be used to initiate anti-government flash mobs and civil strife:
At its peak, the project drew in more than 40,000 Cubans to share news and exchange opinions. But its subscribers were never aware it was created by the U.S. government, or that American contractors were gathering their private data in the hope that it might be used for political purposes.
“There will be absolutely no mention of United States government involvement,” according to a 2010 memo from Mobile Accord, one of the project’s contractors. “This is absolutely crucial for the long-term success of the service and to ensure the success of the Mission.”
Somewhat astonishing is again the long term effort, the tenancy and the seemingly unlimited amount of money going into such subversive U.S. programs.
USAID has long been used to “promote democracy”, i.e. to overthrow any government the U.S. government does not like. Several foreign governments have have taken the right steps and banned USAID activities in their countries. But with the use of front companies in various countries and methods similar to the CIA some critical USAID work is off the record and often hidden behind seemingly native and harmless programs. The open and legal USAID work, for example some 65 projects in the Ukraine, is often only a cover for its deeper projects.
As in the case the AP story uncovers USAID and various other government services may create and use online tools to influence masses and abuse them for their own purpose. Russia Today is promoting a new app through which people can “vote” like in a Occupy general assembly. But unlike such an Occupy assembly, where people are physically present, such an online vote tally can be easily manipulated to pretend a consensus for something that is not consensual at all.
It is important not only to be aware of the possible manipulation but to also warn others, especially younger people, of the danger of accepting “virtual” persons, movements and politics as a replacement of the real world. While it is also possible to manipulate the factual reality it is much more expensive to do so than to abuse the “virtual” online realm.
While USAID had to create a Twitter clone for its purpose in Cuba it does not have to do so in other countries. There Twitter is already established and can be readily (ab-)used by foreign governments just like USAID had planned for its Cuba clone. Blocking Twitter, as Turkey has recently done, may be at times necessary to prevent U.S. sponsored “regime change” endeavors.
Divide and conque [sic] rears its ugly Zionist head again.
You know, I like this site, but there is far too much tolerance of anti-semitic language. Same, IMO, goes for the otherwise interesting Saker, with his “AngloZionist” label.
I consider myself anti-Zionist, and believe Israel/Palestine should be a secular state with multiple nationalities, the right of return for all Palestinians, with full compensation, etc..
Here’s why it’s anti-semitic: not because it is anti-Israel, but because it uses anti-Zionism, which is fully supportable — the Zionist’s crimes and discriminatory outrages upon the Palestinians are outrageous and must be opposed — because it elevates Zionism to one of the main, if not the main, cause for the world’s problems today.
The discussion was about the U.S. intelligence budget and activities. So dahoit attributes “divide and conquer” to Zionism. While divide and conquer is a technique used by the Israeli authorities, it is a technique with an ancient derivation, and is usually attributed to the actions of an empire. While irredentist, an aggressive regional power, propagating apartheid-like policies, Israel is not by any reasonable use of the term an empire.
That leads me to Sakar’s use of Anglo-Zionism. While the Zionist state is a major partner of the U.S. and UK, it is not a greater partner than say, France or Germany or… Canada!. The latter could be said with greater specificity to be partners of US imperialism. They also have greater economic clout (particularly Germany).
The attention drawn to the Zionist state out of proportion to its contribution (indeed, it is subsidized by the imperialists) is what makes this anti-semitic, because such a stance aligns itself with the out-and-out anti-semitism of the fascists. The latter label the Zionists, and the Jews, with which they conflate the Zionists, as the primary danger in the world, pulling all the strings in a secret conspiracy (dreamt up by the Romanovs and the Ohkrana). It also means that the recent historical derivation of the rationale of the Zionist state — the massive genocide of Jews in Europe — is never mentioned, or denied. The Holocaust is the primary emotional engine for nationalist feelings among many Jews. Zionism was not the right answer to the holocaust, but without taking into account what happened, it means that Jews feel politically isolated and endangered once again.
The only substance to giving the Zionist state of Israel such prominence is, one, its nuclear capacity. But once again, this does not differentiate it from other powers, such as France, or even putative sometime ally India. And two, its collaboration with repressive agencies of a number of states. But in this, once again, they are not differentiated from other U.S. collaborators, including the French, the British, and the Germans. I’m sure there are plenty of others.
Long ago, August Bebel derided those within the socialist movement who were obsessed out of all proportion by the activities of the Jews (and there certainly are or have been, for instance, powerful Jewish financiers, historically — just not controlling the world or totally financial markets; yet ask yourself, how much does Israel control the world’s stock and commodity exchanges… mainly not at all!). Bebel called such socialism, the “socialism of fools.”
I know this kind of behavior won’t probably change here, but I could not let such casual anti-semitism, even if not meant to be anti-semitism, pass by.
Posted by: Jeff Kaye | Apr 4 2014 14:28 utc | 77
|
