Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
September 08, 2018

NYT Reconfirms U.S. Coup Plot In Venezuela - Adds Pro-Coup Propaganda

U.S. rejects claim by Venezuela's Maduro that U.S. envoys engaged in conspiracy - Reuters - May 22 2018

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. State Department said on Tuesday it rejected accusations by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro that two top U.S. diplomats were engaged in what Maduro called a “military conspiracy” or had been meddling in the country’s economic and political issues.

Maduro earlier on Tuesday ordered the expulsion of U.S. charge d’affaires Todd Robinson and another senior diplomat, Brian Naranjo, ordering them to leave Venezuela within 48 hours.

As the saying goes: "Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied." The above denial confirmed Nicolas Maduro's claim of U.S. coup attempts against the Venezuelan government. A new report reconfirms the plot and reveals some new details of the still unwritten larger story.

Trump Administration Discussed Coup Plans With Rebel Venezuelan Officers - New York Times - September 8 2018

The Trump administration held secret meetings with rebellious military officers from Venezuela over the last year to discuss their plans to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro, according to American officials and a former Venezuelan military commander who participated in the talks.
The administration initially considered dispatching Juan Cruz, a veteran Central Intelligence Agency official who recently stepped down as the White House’s top Latin America policymaker. But White House lawyers said it would be more prudent to send a career diplomat instead.
After the first meeting, which took place in the fall of 2017, the diplomat reported that the Venezuelans didn’t appear to have a detailed plan and had showed up at the encounter hoping the Americans would offer guidance or ideas, officials said.
The American diplomat then met the coup plotters a third time early this year, but the discussions did not result in a promise of material aid or even a clear signal that Washington endorsed the rebels’ plans, according to the Venezuelan commander and several American officials.
Days later, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has sought to shape the Trump administration’s approach toward Latin America, wrote a series of Twitter posts that encouraged dissident members of the Venezuelan armed forces to topple their commander in chief.

The Venezuelan generals the U.S. diplomat plotted with, are under U.S. sanctions for alleged corruption and drug smuggling. Isn't it illegal to deal with them? The story claims that nothing came from these talks. I see no reason to believe that. One attempt may have failed. But the U.S. surely continues to cultivate such contacts to overthrow the Venezuelan government.

The NYT hack, Ernesto Londoño, also inserts this:

Establishing a clandestine channel with coup plotters in Venezuela was a big gamble for Washington, given its long history of covert intervention across Latin America. Many in the region still deeply resent the United States for backing previous rebellions, coups and plots in countries like Cuba, Nicaragua, Brazil and Chile, and for turning a blind eye to the abuses military regimes committed during the Cold War.

Only Cuba, Nicaragua, Brazil and Chile? It seems that a not-so-small number of other U.S. coups in South America are missing here, even very recent ones. Why is there no mention of the 2009 military coup in Honduras, which the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton avidly supported? And it was only during the Cold War that the U.S. turned a bling eye to torture? What about the ongoing abuses regimes in Latin America currently commit?

Then there is also this nonsense:

Most Latin American leaders agree that Venezuela’s president, Mr. Maduro, is an increasingly authoritarian ruler who has effectively ruined his country’s economy, leading to extreme shortages of food and medicine.

"Most Latin American leaders" obviously means those satraps the U.S. installed and supports. Even then it is doubtful that they say such things. The author just abuses them to introduce a false claim.

It is not Maduro "who has effectively ruined his country’s economy". Illegal U.S. sanctions against Venezuela, imposed under Obama as well as Trump, did and do that.

Max Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research explains on BBC (vid) how the U.S. is waging a brutal economic war against Venezuela. It is this war that caused the depression and makes a recovery from the induced hyperinflation nearly impossible. Billions of dollars that Venezuelan owns and needs are frozen in U.S. accounts. U.S. sanctions make it extremely difficult for the country to sell assets or to borrow money:

[W]ith Trump’s executive order, even if Venezuela were to stabilize the exchange rate and return to growth, it would be cut off from borrowing, investment, and proprietary sources of income such as dividend payments from Venezuela-owned but US-based Citgo Petroleum. This makes a sustained recovery nearly impossible without outside help—or a new government that is approved by the Trump administration.

Venezuela is a rich country. It has the biggest known oil reserves on the planet, though much of those are difficult to retrieve.

That is of course the reason why the U.S. wants to install a rightwing proxy government in Venezuela. It is the reason why it wages war  against its people.

China is currently the only country with the necessary capacity and geopolitical standing to support Venezuela. It would the best for the country, and for the world, if China would come to its help.


Posted by b on September 8, 2018 at 15:09 UTC | Permalink

« previous page

China may be working on this canal which the USA wants to prevent.

A Costa Rican told me that work has already begun.


Posted by: fast freddy | Sep 9 2018 15:51 utc | 101

@ Posted by: mali | Sep 9, 2018 9:29:25 AM | 90

People never blame capitalism when things go south for the simple reason we live in an era where capitalism is hegemonic.

So, when failures in capitalism happens (specially in the center of capitalism, the First World countries), the majority of its peoples consider it a mere fatality, a natural disaster, nobody's fault not a systemic failure. This happens because, when a system is hegemonic, it is viewed as natural by its subjects -- that's why, when Argentina entered in a meltdown, people gave a pass to Macri, clamining he "did everything that was possible".


As for the distinction between capitalism and socialism: capitalism is the system where capital is the dominant form of social reproduction. That doesn't mean other modes of social reproduction can't exist in capitalism -- as long as capital is the dominant one.

So, we have pockets of socialism in some capitalist countries (e.g. NHS in the UK etc.), but that doesn't make those countries socialists -- capital is still the dominant form of social reproduction there.

We had capital in Ancient Egypt (rope lines of production) and Ancient Rome (mines); and we had servile workforce (manorialism) in the Roman High Empire, since at least Hadrianus (coloni) -- but they remained (ancient) slavery economies because slavery continued to be the dominant form of social reproduction: instances of feudalism and capitalism remained the exception, not the rule.

China is a socialist country because the dominant form of social reproduction is the workers' owned means of production (including land, which is always the State's property; when you buy land in China, you're actually purchasing a 70-year lease from the government; there's no way you can inherit land). The main corporations are State-owned. Only the non-strategic sectors can be privately owned. Only the even less strategic sectors can be owned by foreigners. The financial system is entirely nationalised. That's why, when the Chinese government "intervenes" in "the economy", it actually works, while the same is not true in the capitalist countries: in the capitalist countries, the percentage of ownership of the State is too small to make a difference.

So, yes, capitalism and socialism are not ideologies. You can objectivelly tell if a given system is capitalist or socialist, as long as you use the correct theory (i.e. Karl Marx).

Venezuela is not a socialist country in the economic sense, but it is a capitalist country governed by a party which is willing to make a transtion to socialism -- that's why the USA is willing to act fast.


As for Venezuela's "alliance" with Russia-China.

This "alliance" kinda already exists: Venezuela, since Chávez, is buying Russian weapons. Recently, it has been asking for Chinese investment in infrastructure. It is this already existing "alliance" which is keeping it from already being invaded:

The next 90 Days will Define the Future of Venezuela (and South America):

The biggest problem, however, is that neither China nor Russia have the logistics to sustain an overseas (in relation to Eurasia) proxy war. The Chinese government published a note about thee WH's consideration about regime changing Venezuela during Trump's government:

Hegemonism will cost US popularity in Latin America:

Here're the last two paragraphs:

In recent years, relations between China and Latin America have gained positive momentum. Some within the US have suggested the White House pay more attention to Latin American countries so as not to lose the region to China. But China is not the decisive factor for the chill in US-Latin America ties.

While China's increased involvement in the region is out of its own development needs, the changes in ties between Washington and Latin America are a result of the US hegemonic mentality - it views the region as its backyard rather than from an equal perspective. If Washington insists on unilateral actions, it will not hold on to the region; instead, it will be abandoned.

Posted by: vk | Sep 9 2018 16:22 utc | 102

Haveing sliced and diced this imported subject, and identified the seriousness of the whole world wide picture that Venezaula fits into, along with Syria Iran ,south America Africa. It's clear not only how brutal and pervasive the U S invasion machine is,but also how financially insane from enyones perspective. Boiling that down to one word--- it's totally ' Absured ' this has been noted in the past recent history of the yanks ! The book catch 22 . But humour can be a powerful weapon . Right now we need to Laugh and ridicule them ! My contribution is 'Alice's restaraunt' a classic anti war/Vietnam song possable ya major help in stopping that war ! We got a choice cry or laugh at the yanks ! YouTube it.

Posted by: Mark2 | Sep 9 2018 16:36 utc | 103

@47 grieved... lol.. thanks for that!

@52 vk.. i may have read red ryder wrong.. regardless, i continue to believe the usa and the supremacy of us$ on the world stage is a cancer borne out with the financial sanctions the usa is also responsible for.. when it will end, i have no idea.. as for corruption - yes, it is everywhere and it is necessary for us to address it.. in answer to your first question - why does the usa choose to invade venezuela? i think what the usa is unable to do with softer power - cia, arming moderate headchoppers and etc - it will do with a more direct intervention.. the usa is sick and the sickness needs to end, just like mccain who died.. at some point the usa as it is presently structured, needs to die.. thanks for your insights and comments vk..

@55 bevin.. thanks for your comments.. i never said that, but thanks for throwing me under the bus for saying i agreed in part with red ryder..i am not siding with the usa in any of this, but that part you seem to have intentionally ignored..and ironically you never mention me in the zillion of other comments i make pointing out how much i appreciate your commentary! oh well.. thanks for showing me another side of you..

@72 psychohistorian.. thanks for your post here..

@76 nemesiscalling.. hey - i really dig your posts and learn from you most of the time.. keep on sharing your insights..

@83 you and others point out regularly - financial sanctions are a form of war.. that the usa has called war on various countries from it's position of power given the us$ after the 2nd ww is worth pointing out regularly... financial sanctions are a tool of the empire that are meant to destroy the countries they impose these financial sanctions on..

@93 bm.. i agree with you on that quote you isolated from mali..

final comment.. red ryder has a lot of clarity on a lot of the topics especially related to russia and i for one really appreciate their input... now, maybe i misunderstood them here, but want to go on record saying how much i appreciate their input on moa more generally speaking.....

Posted by: james | Sep 9 2018 17:19 utc | 104

@ vk who wrote: "The financial system is entirely nationalised."

I agree with most of what you said but as of last March what you wrote is not entirely true. I don't have the link and am going on holiday for a few days but I believe that China made it so that foreign folks can own 51% interest of financial institutions.

If true, it is why US is being thrown under bus as private folk buy up China finance......and then the default which I have been writing is coming

Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 9 2018 17:24 utc | 105

@105 China has opened certain financial sectors to 51% foreign ownership. Probably in a bid to deflect US criticism.

Should be noted that foreign firms are a very small part of the the financial services sector which is dominated by big state-invested companies. Also buying the extra 1% will not be cheap or easy.

Posted by: dh | Sep 9 2018 17:36 utc | 106

@102 vk.. thanks for your overview and the link on the next 90 days..

i am curious how you view the bail out in 2008 of wall st? is that capitalism, or socialism? or what is that? seems like a rigged system to me either way... when does the next financial disaster/bail out happen? if that is capitalism, then capitalism isn't all it is cracked up to be..

Posted by: james | Sep 9 2018 17:39 utc | 107

What is america trying to protect ? Its ' unipolar moment ' which 'is at risk' as its Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen says explicitly in this revealing quote, picked up by the saker.

" We are witnessing historic changes across the entire threat landscape ... The balance of power that has characterized the international system for decades has been corroding. America's unipolar moment is at risk. "

Posted by: anon | Sep 9 2018 17:57 utc | 108


Because they can use those dollars to print more of their own currency, pay off dollar denominated loans or buy other stuff from countries who want to be paid in dollars

Posted by: Pft | Sep 10 2018 2:05 utc | 109

tanks it is great for our site

Posted by: ratin97 | Sep 10 2018 9:25 utc | 110

tanks it is great for our site

Posted by: ratin97 | Sep 10 2018 9:25 utc | 111


1. If Russia did not have a Russian central effectively owned and controlled by the City of London Anglo-Zionist bankers, the Russians would be able to print as many Rubles as they wished, just like the Americans. Why has Putin not nationalized the Russian central bank as promised many years ago?

2. Yes, why does Putin leave in place the Russian Constitution written under Yeltsin which stipulates that the Russian central bank must remain beholden to foreign Anglo-Zionist bankers and allowed to issue its own Russian Ruble currency only if the Russians can obtain dollars, and must buy only US Treasuries with the the dollars the Russians get from their oil sales?

3. Why is Russia saddling itself with dollar-denominated debt when Russia doesn't even need to borrow money as it basically has a balanced budget and produces its own oil and gas and food and cars, planes and weapons?

4. What is it that's so crucial again, that Russia must obtain dollars from Anglo-Zionist bankers and American vassals in order to buy from the West? When Russia even sells oil and gas directly to the United States of America?

I'm quaking in my shoes waiting for your thunderous response that's going to turn my deluded little world upside down.

Posted by: USA=ISIS | Sep 10 2018 12:47 utc | 112

Snippet of Truth occasionally gets published by BigLie Media.

Posted by: karlof1 | Sep 10 2018 16:32 utc | 113

@114 usa=isis.. you seem to be missing an important bit of understanding on world finance at present.. yes, it is a stacked deck towards the us$.. yes, the financial institutions are all skewed to heavily favour the us$, but yes other countries under the thumb of the us$ are very much aware of it and working towards changing it... they may not adopt the quick method you suggest for some obvious reasons, that you appear to want to berate them for as a consequence... i really don't believe you are looking at this objectively, but your tone is really off putting which leads me to believe you will blow off what i have to say here too.. consider this my first and last post to you if so..

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 16:58 utc | 114

@115 karlof1.. that is like how the usa supports moderate headchoppers in syria.. when americans find out the moderate headchoppers are isis, al nusra, al qaeda and etc - they just quickly forget about it, as the nyt, wapo, wsj and etc will provide them with a new line that they will buy without question as well!

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 17:00 utc | 115

@116 james

First, you tell me *why* any of what I say is wrong instead of merely asserting that I'm wrong *without* offering a single cogent rational counter argument. I am not interested in discussing my "tone" with you on this public forum and waste bandwidth and other people's time. Otherwise feel free to regurgitate the mainstream meme that the West and the East are enemies when they are all ruled by the same powerful people.

My friend,

Did you know that Yeltsin and Bill Clinton *collaborated* to fix Russian elections? Did you know that Yeltsin appointed Putin because Putin is a "cipher," meaning a zero? Read it from the horse's mouth, namely BILL CLINTON himself. Putin attempted to prevent the publishing of these records by the Bill Clinton Presidential Library:

Posted by: USA=ISIS | Sep 10 2018 18:30 utc | 116

@115 karlof1

Good catch. Thanks for sharing.

Posted by: USA=ISIS | Sep 10 2018 18:38 utc | 117

@118 usa=isis... saying what you say, by asking questions - can't wrong!! unless the question is loaded... you're call on that my friend... i don't know that i said you were wrong in any of the statements you made, just in the conclusions you're making from all of it... of course you are aware oil is still denominated in us$ in the world today? countries can consider getting around this by doing direct exchanges with one another, as i believe russia and china are doing at this time.. but generally speaking it hasn't become

as for yeltsin thinking putin was a cipher - yes, i was aware of that, however i am also aware that putin didn't turn out exactly as yeltsin had imagined - far from it actually.. thanks for the helmer link.. i generally like john's articles.. as for usa meddling in russia at the time of gorbochev/yeltsin - this is well known, although the average person in the usa might know little about it, which might explain their general amnesia regarding this tempest in a teapot about russian meddling in the usa election of trump..

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 19:06 utc | 118

become a regular phenom..

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 19:07 utc | 119

here is what i mean by 'tone'.. you appear to suggest, although you don't come out and say it directly - that putin is some type of patsy for the international banking cartel and if he had any backbone he would dispense with it all immediately.. if that is what you are saying - i completely disagree with it and believe putin sees the bigger picture here much better then you or i..

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 19:36 utc | 120

USA=ISIS @ 114, James;

Russia and China have been preparing their own alternative to the SWIFT payments system and that appears to be the priority over centralising the CBR.

There is probably not much Russia can do at present to change that part of its Constitution concerning the ownership of the CBR without attracting Western MSM attention and setting in motion regime change efforts by Washington DC in Russia. Even something relatively minor as the proposal to raise the minimum age at which people become eligible for the age pension in Russia has attracted excess Western MSM attention (perhaps in part because Western news media can't find anything else other than the pathetic Salisbury / Novichok saga or the proverbial feather to beat Russia with) with the concomitant protests organised by allies of the Western-favoured "opposition leader" Alexei Navalny that feature the curious spectacle of teenagers and university-age young adults protesting the proposed age pension changes.

Any significant moves Russia might make that changes the status of the CBR or its ability to influence the Russian economy and other economies through trade or movements in global exchange rates have to be taken slowly in ways that do not suggest a pattern or hidden intentions to outsiders.

Posted by: Jen | Sep 10 2018 22:25 utc | 121

@123 jen.. thanks.. that is in line with how i see it... brics was another arm of this that had been in development prior to the take down of brasils leader dilma rousseff a few years ago..

Posted by: james | Sep 10 2018 22:56 utc | 122


"Even something relatively minor as the proposal to raise the minimum age at which people become eligible for the age pension in Russia has attracted excess Western MSM attention"

Certainly not minor to many of Russias middle class and it got a lot of attention in Russias press as well. The west loves it as its the kind of neoliberal policy they embrace

The CBR is already government owned. Constitution just needs changing to give the President more control and to make the CBR fund government deficits and force them to lower interest rates without tanking the Ruble

Posted by: Pft | Sep 11 2018 4:19 utc | 123

@96 Kiza

You're the one who knows nothing and start attacking other personally. You're even insulting me by calling names such as "lefties"

Did I ever mention specifically anything about "left", "Socialism", "communism" etc?

Read well before you even post any comment will you? You're only making a fool at yourself.

"Like I said, simply check whether a suspicious "alternative" website is real or not by checking whether it supports certain countries while supporting others (The most popular ones are those supporting Russia and bashing China, Iran, North Korea, etc)."

This is the reason why I criticize zerohedge./B>

Posted by: Face The Fact | Sep 14 2018 11:25 utc | 124

« previous page

The comments to this entry are closed.