Se acerca el día
del traspaso de mando en el Imperio. Llueven las hipótesis conspirativas. Acá
va una, del sitio web Moon of Alabama. A ver si te gusta:
Título: "It
Can't Happen Here" - Color Revolution By Force
Texto: The
"Donald Trump likes Russia" and "Russia bad" strategy was
propagated by the Clinton election campaign. It build on constant U.S.
incitement against Russia after the U.S. coup in Ukraine partially failed and
after the Russian intervention on the side of the government in Syria. Hillary
Clinton as Secretary of State was the main force behind the original
anti-Russian campaign. When Clinton lost the election to Trump the theme
connecting Trump and Russia was continued and
fanned by parts of the U.S. intelligence community.
The Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) and the FBI published a propaganda report claiming
nefarious Russian cyber activities during the election without providing any
evidence. The report came together with the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats
by the Obama administration. The DHS then planted a false story of Russian
cyber-intrusion into a Vermont utility with the Washington Post.
The Director of
National Intelligence Clapper followed up with a "report" of alleged
Russian interference with the election. Even the Putinphobe Masha Gessen found
that to be a shoddy piece of implausible propaganda. The DNI then helped to
publish an MI6 "report" of fakes asserting Russian influence on
Trump. In an unprecedented threat escalation the Pentagon sends a whole brigade
and other assets to the Russian border.
Now the head of
the Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, warns the President elect to
"watch his tongue". Is there any precedence of some
"intelligence" flunky threatening a soon to be President?
This has been,
all together, a well though out propaganda campaign to reinforce the scheme
Clinton and her overlords have been pushing for quite some time: Russia is bad
and a danger. Trump is aligned with Russia. Something needs to be done against
Trump but most importantly against Russia.
Propaganda works.
The campaign is having some effects:
Americans are
more concerned than they were before the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign began
about the potential threat Russia poses to the country, according to a
Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released on Friday. The Jan. 9-12 survey found that
82 percent of American adults, including 84 percent of Democrats and 82 percent
of Republicans, described Russia as a general "threat" to the United
States. That's up from 76 percent in March 2015 when the same questions were
asked.
Such extensive
and expensive campaigns are not run by chance. They have a larger purpose.
Originally the
campaign was only directed against Russia with the apparent aim of reigniting a
(quite profitable) cold war. Seen from some distance the campaign now looks
more like the preparation for a typical CIA induced color-revolution:
In most but not
all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for
fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered
by their opponents to be authoritarian.
What is missing
yet in the U.S. are the demonstrations and the large civilian strife.
Unlike the
earlier CIA launched color revolutions in Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004) and
elsewhere, all recent U.S. instigated "color-revolutions", i.e.
putsch attempts, have been accompanied by the use of force from the side of the
"peaceful protesters". Such color-revolutions by force were instigate
in Libya, Syria and Ukraine.
A common
denominator of these was the primary use of violence occurred from the
"good side" against the "bad side" while the propagandists
claimed that it was the "bad side" that started the shooting and
strife. The "good site" is inevitably "demonstrating
peacefully" even when many policemen or soldiers on the "bad
side" die. Thus was the case in Libya where the U.S. and its Gulf proxies
used al-Qeada aligned Jihadis from Benghazi as "peaceful
demonstrators" against the government, in Syria where the NATO and Gulf
supported Muslim Brotherhood killed policemen and soldiers during
"peaceful demonstrations" in Deraa and in Ukraine where fascist
sharpshooters killed demonstrators and policemen from a hotel roof in the hand
of the opposition. All three happened while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of
State.
There have been
claims of an upcoming color-revolution in the U.S. from different extremist
sides of the political spectrum. Before the election Neocon Jackson Diehl
claimed that "Putin" was preparing a color-revolution against a
President-elect Clinton to enthrone Donald Trump. But as Trump won fair and
square and Clinton lost that plot did not make it to the stage. After the
election the conspiracy peddler Wayne Madsen immediately "discovered"
that Clinton and George Soros were launching a color-revolution against Trump.
Remnants of the
Clinton campaign have called for a large anti-Trump demonstration during the
inauguration on January 20 in Washington DC.
Mass shootings in
the United States by this or that type of lunatics happen every other month.
There are no wild conspiracy theories or nefarious plots necessary to consider
some what-if questions around such an event.
So what happens
after some "Trump supporter" on January 20 starts to shoot into the
demonstrating masses (and also into the police cordons)?
What if the CIA,
DHS and DNI then detect and certify that the ensuing "massacre" was a
"Russian plot"?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario