Media Press Agents for Trump Regime Anti-Venezuela Coup Plot
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org - Home - Stephen Lendman)
Establishment media are in lockstep with all US wars of aggression, color revolutions, and old-fashioned coups like what's ongoing in Venezuela.
They oppose social democracy the way it should be wherever it exists, supporting imperial power to replace it with US-controlled fascist tyranny.
Along with other major media, the NYT is frustrated over the Trump regime's failure to topple Venezuela's Maduro and eliminate Bolivarian social democracy, saying the following:
"After issuing new rounds of sanctions and revoking hundreds of visas in hopes of pressuring Mr. Maduro to leave office, the Trump (regime) already faced an uphill battle. But Mr. Maduro has shown little sign of leaving office…"
The Times and other establishment media fail to explain that Venezuela's electoral process is the world's best, polar opposite the money-controlled US system, a one-party state with two extremist right wings - fantasy democracy, not the real thing.
Since Hugo Chavez transformed Venezuela from a fascist police state into the hemisphere's preeminent democracy, around two dozen elections were held - all judged open, free, and fair by independent international observers, including Maduro's reelection as president last May by an overwhelming margin.
The Times: "Russia shows little sign of tamping down its involvement based on Mr. Trump's warnings. The landing of two Russian planes this week was done in broad daylight, and carried supplies and technical advisers to the Venezuelan capital…"
Since 2001, both countries have cooperated with each other politically, economically and financially, their actions entirely legal and mutually beneficial.
In its reporting on Venezuela, the Times failed to explain what's going on is a Trump regime coup attempt to topple its legitimate government. Nor has it denounced Guaido as an imposter and traitor to his country.
CNN's Fareed Zakaria is a pathetic figure, supporting US wars of aggression and other imperial lawlessness.
He's against what he called a "pesky Congress," constraining self-declared presidential power to wage war, claiming for the US it's always for a "broader moral and political purpose" - the rule of law be damned.
In August 2012, he was suspended from his job for a week on charges of plagiarism, calling it "a terrible mistake." He was also accused of improper citations in various pieces.
In the 1980s, he opposed anti-apartheid divestment from South Africa. The New Republic once included him on a list of what it called "over-rated thinkers," adding:
"There's something suspicious about a thinker (sic) always so perfectly in tune with the moment" - on the wrong side of one issue after another, the publication failed to stress.
He's been criticized for fear-mongering, promoting US imperial policies. He pretends "crazed Arabs" were responsible for 9/11 - long ago exposed US state-sponsored criminality, the mother of all false flags.
The neocon/CIA house organ Washington Post earlier accused Zakaria of "problematic" sourcing in five columns for the broadsheet.
Yet it gave him feature March 28 op-ed space, urging Trump regime hardliners to "stand up to Putin" on Venezuela, calling it "a crucial test of his foreign policy," adding:
"So far, Trump's pressure has not worked. Maduro has dug in, and the Venezuelan military has not abandoned its support for him."
Maduro has far more than "some support," reelected president by an overwhelming majority. In describing Russian support for Venezuela's legitimate ruling authorities, Zakaria turned truth on its head claiming:
Putin supports Maduro "because it adds to Russia's clout in global oil markets, but above all because it furthers (his) central foreign policy objective — the formation of a global anti-American coalition of countries that can frustrate US purposes…"
His "efforts seem designed to taunt the United States…The big question for Washington is: Will it allow Moscow to make a mockery of another US red line?"
"The United States and Russia have taken opposing, incompatible stands on this issue. And as with Syria, there is a danger that, if Washington does not back its words with deeds, a year from now, we will be watching the consolidation of the Maduro regime, supported with Russian arms and money."
"Why has Trump been unwilling to confront Putin in any way on any issue? And will Venezuela be the moment when Trump finally ends his appeasement?"
Fact: Putin and other Russian officials promote world peace and stability. They seek mutual cooperation with other countries. US policies are polar opposite - seeking dominance over all other nations by brute force if other tactics fail.
Russia seeks to "taunt" no one. Its foreign policy extends diplomatic outreach to other countries, opposing belligerence and other strong-arm tactics used by the US.
Indeed the policies of Russia and Trump regime hardliners on Venezuela are world's apart and irreconcilable - Moscow supporting Bolivarian sovereign independence, the US wanting it eliminated.
Straightaway in office, Trump was co-opted by dark forces to pursue their domestic and geopolitical agendas. He's a front man for Washington's war on humanity at home and abroad.
Zakaria is an imperial mouthpiece, a figure with no credibility, supporting US rage for unchallenged global dominance.
He opposes Russia and other countries for multi-world polarity, mutually beneficial cooperation among all nations, and world peace - notions he finds abhorrent.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at email@example.com.
My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."