United States has attempted to create fifth columnist element in Venezuela

by Kenneth T. Tellis
So, those people who style themselves Cuban exiles in Miami want Cuba to return to the old ways of capitalism? Remember capitalism has never been democracy, but a form of rule by corruption and not law. What are these exiles really asking for is the question?

Cuba will all its lack or the daily necessities of people, does not have problems like the US where people suffer from every known disease, including overweight. Why is that so?

Because in its need for so-called daily necessities, there are no McDonald's, Burger Kings, Kentucky Fried Chicken and a host of other Fast-Food Joints, which load up children and adults, with sugars, starches and cholesterol galore.

Which in turn create the need for drugs to cure the the problems of heart, diabetes and a host of other diseases.

Who gets the money from this opulent overweight society, if not the drug companies?

I doubt if Cuba, with its lack of these killer foods has a problem of people being overweight, having heart complaints, diabetes, and the many diseases that plague the US or societies that over indulge in unhealthy practices.

Venezuela too, does not have so many people with the above problems. Why? Because, only societies where the Fast-Buck and Fast-Food rule has these problems. There is very little that a healthy society needs in the area of drugs ... because there aren't these problems which need them.

In the capitalist societies of today, nowhere does democracy exist.

For capitalists to claim that they further democracy, is like Adolf Hitler claiming to support human rights.

We know that it is just not possible, because the fuel that runs the capitalist system is money and corruption. It is corporate corruption that feeds and nurtures the capitalist system, where democracy is either non-existent or under wraps, but never in practice.

* The word democracy has been bandied around by capitalists, not just in the US but all over the world.

Note how that word democracy has been used by the Bush capitalist regime. When the elected government of Pakistan was overthrown by a military dictatorship, the US denounced it. Yet, when that Pakistani military dictatorship cosies-up to the Bush regime in support of its Afghan invasion, the Pakistani military junta suddenly became a democracy in US eyes...

* In other words if a dictatorship colludes with the Bush regime it suddenly becomes a democracy.

The second factor is, the moment India cosies-up to the Bush regime, it suddenly became the world's largest democracy. But is India in fact really a democracy? That can be answered immediately. What kind of democracy has a caste system based on religion, that has endured for thousands of years? Only a sham democracy would claim that a system which creates indentured slaves of millions of people, could make such a claim false claim. No where on earth has there been such human degradation and bondage by a religious group than in India. It continues unabated and is promoted by the US in subtle ways.

The outsourcing of jobs to India by various US corporations, does not reach the masses of those who belong to lower caste. Is that not the promotion of slavery? Why is the US itself a sham democracy claiming to fight for and further democracy, when the opposite is true?

In order to make new allies, the US is cultivating friendship with India. India swallowing the bait, is becoming a dupe of US imperialism. What are the real US intentions towards India? To use that country as a buffer against China's might. China on the other hand is making trade and other alliances in Asia and around the world. Militarily, China could beat India hands down. India's nuclear, missile and space programs are all backed by the US. But India could in the long run pay the piper for the US, which is using her, if a war with the Sleeping Dragon ever took place. India, also borders China and lost badly to China in 1962, when it assumed that China was weak. In reality, it is not China that is weak, but India is.

To say that China is not a democracy, and India is, is to lie through one's teeth.

In fact neither India nor China are democracies ... but US spin-doctors keep pushing their propaganda that India is a democracy and China is not!

Of recent in order to push China, the US has used India to muck-rake on Tibet. The Indian government and people have made an industry of the Chinese occupation of Tibet, and are milking it for all its worth. But, it is quite clear that India's attempts to bring up the Tibet issue, are based on their own agenda, and not does not really have the interests of Tibetans at heart. For all its claims to care about Tibet and the Dalai Lama, where was India when the Chinese People's Army invaded Tibet? Nowhere on the scene is the answer. But today, all and sundry in India, create movements which use Tibet as thumping ground against China.

These at the very least are fronts used by the Indian government to gain world attention upon itself as a great liberator and a country that cares for human rights, when nothing could be further from that fact. No one denies that the Tibet is under Chinese occupation ... but why does the pot (India) call the kettle (China) black? India has no more interest in Tibet than it has in removing the embedded caste system that has plagued it for centuries.

If China was such a vicious country as made out by the US, why is it the biggest producer of goods for the US market? Surely, one does not trade with despots. Unless of course there is much to be gained. The reality is, that in US policy, the ends justify the means.

The US invasion of Iraq, is pretty clear, it never was to promote democracy, but get control of its OIL FIELDS. This just another case on annexation by military force, which is no different to China's invasion of Tibet. Note: India has never denounced the US for its occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Why is the question? Is India afraid that to do so, might anger the US, which it does not want to do.

The direct intervention into elections in Latin America, by US agencies that donate money to candidates that are in effect US puppets and are fronts for US-owned corporations. The US has openly violated the laws of many Latin American states by contributing to political parties that it favors. It attempted this and failed miserably in Venezuela. Failing that, it threatened to invade the country.

Why would the US want to invade a country that has democratically elected its leader?

The reasons are the same as in Iraq. Venezuela, like Iraq has OIL, and the US believes that it must control the oil resources of the world, by whatever mean necessary. It has attempted to create a fifth columnist element in Venezuela, funded through different so-called programs for the promotion of democracy, which are actually, US government agencies dedicated to the overthrow of the legally elected government of Venezuela.

In Bolivia, the US got a black-eye, when the candidate that it favored and funded, lost the election to a peoples candidate there is still unrest in Bolivia, as the US is not satisfied with what happened there. Now, we come to the recent Mexican election, where US money was powered in, and a pro-US candidate seemingly won the election. The question is, was the election rigged the same way the US election in 2004 was rigged?

* We are now coming to the Middle East. The US has roiled up the conflict in the Middle East, but it could be a case of smoke and mirrors. The real aim of the US is to seize the OIL FIELDS in Iran.

But, just how does it aim to achieve this? Why of course, by dragging Iran into the conflicts in Palestine and Lebanon. Towards year's end the US will, without doubt, invade Iran and seize its OIL FIELDS in a blitzkrieg war. But, then there are other powers watching the US today that might intervene.

These two, are Russia and People's China ... for the US, the invasion of Iran is a gamble. But a gamble, that might cost the US dearly.

Does it have the capacity to fight a war on many different fronts?

What happened to the Germans that were fighting on the western front in Europe, and then got themselves into a war on the eastern front in the Soviet Union?

Why, of course, STALINGRAD?

Perhaps that is how the US dreams of a WORLD EMPIRE will end! They will be faced with a war on all fronts, with nowhere to retreat.