SOA\WHENSIC and the Coup in Honduras

History is a witness to a century long American hegemony and a barbaric CIA counterinsurgency in Latin America. This influence has been supported by a pseudo-academy,the School of Americas ( SOA) - today its new name the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation( WHENSIC) - which has trained and continues to inculcate right-wing military candidates in techniques of torture, execution arbitrary arrest, kidnappings, extrajudicial processes, and the overthrow of democratically elected officials. The most current coup d'etat is of Manuel Zelaya, the president of Honduras on Sunday, June 27.

The School of the Americas was first established in Panama in 1946; however, it was evicted in 1984 by the Panamanian governement and it re-positioned itself in Fort Benning, Georgia ( visit: www.soaw.org). Here, the school has trained approximately 60,000 Latin American soldiers in a variety of counterinsurgency techniques to either destabilise democratically elected officials\governments or practice coup d'etat with the support of the CIA and members of the DOD.

The Obama Administration has failed to identify this illegal action as a coup d'etat. The US Administration must articulate more forceful language, as well as publicly rebuke the SOA which has trained the officials that participated in the putsch. Moreover, in the past, especially during the nineteen eighties, the US Reagan Administration had established very intimate relations with the Honduran military elite.

The Honduran military government permitted American supported Nicaraguan paramilitary groups, the Contras, to wage a counterinsurgency to overthrow the Sandinista government of Daniel Ortiega. The Contras were trained, supplied and aided by the Reagan Administration. Furthermore, there had been a number of clandestine activities, one the Iran-Contra Affair; this covert military activity provided the Reagan Adm. to channel funds and procure arms for the Contras or Counter- revolutinaries. One important agent was Colonel Oliver North who performed a leading role in this clandestine event.

An infamous battalion, Battalion 316, trained by the CIA terrorised Hondurans and civilians of Central America. It is evident that there is a barbaric link between the CIA and the Honduran military. It is important to ponder how many of the soldiers of this battalion are presently engaged in the military coup today in Honduras. There were thousands of Hondurans that were executed and tortured by Battalion 316.

There is another salient link to the military junta of Honduras during the 1980s, this association is with the former USA ambassador to Honduras, Mr John Negroponte, who was a conduit for funds, logistical support, arms caches in order to permit the Nicaraguan Contra forces to engage in their counterinsugency via Honduras and sanction the Honduran Battalion 316 to sustain their human rights abuses against alleged "subversives.

One key feature that the American corporate media neglects in this seminal event of American dominance over Latin America is the corporate association. Chiquita, formerly United Fruit Company and United Brands- an American MNC which cultivates bananas and pineapples for export to North America- has had historically a significant influence on the Honduran political and military apparatuses- as well as terrorist cells or paramilitary death forces- since the 1920s. Moreover, this fruit company controls-since the early 20th century- an infinite amount of land in Honduras, approximately 650, 000 acres of arable terrain, as well as an intricate network of infrastructure: rail and road. Chiquita- as well as Dole- was disappointed with President Zelaya's labour reform practices, increasing the minimum wage for the plantation labourers by 60 %. These MNCs expressed concern to Tegucigalpa that they would lose millions of dollars of profits pursuant to these new labour reforms( Kozloff 1).

Why has the mainstream media failed to proffer this salient footnote? Does this silence also reveal the reason behind the Obama Administration's omission of identifying this change in Honduran leadership as a "military coup?" What role does the Chiquita corporate lobby have on USA foreign policy? Which members of the present American administration have affiliations with these fruit companies- Dole and Chiquita- and, more critically, receive inducements?

Today, a new strategy is required by the Obama Administration, but especially by the international community, in order to deconstruct and dismantle the American hegemony in Latin America. However, it is difficult to deconstruct American foreign policy in Honduras and other South and Central American countries, if this former nation-state refuses to prosecute those American officials that were responsible for torture, extraordinary rendition, secret sites, and a denial of habeas corpus to the many alleged enemy combatants in Bush's 'War on Terror'. The Western post-industrialised nation-states must divest themselves of all the sanctimonious praxis and dialectic in order to inaugurate a fresh relationship with Latin America that respects the sovereignty of all nation-states and the human rights of its citizens.

Iran: A Renewed Revolution

It has been thirty years since the Iranian Revolution of 1979, and has anything of substance changed. In today's headlines, most major corporate newspapers write-chime- about a Green Revolution, but was Mousavi not the same leader that maintained the reigns during the theocratic movement and the Iran-Iraq War, which was waged for eight years, 1981-1989?

The theocratic government's tools of repression and oppression have been evident with the present " Green Revolution's" campaign to protest the election results. However, is it more than just a political protest, or is it a revolution to overthrow the present theocracy and their paramilitary wings, such as the Banjis which terrorise citizens after 22h?

How has the new Green Revolution affected the the rights of women in Iran? Are women members of this theocratic hierarchy?
How and where do they find the will to support the Sharia law- in Afghanistan, the American supported regime of Hamed Karzai, has legalized rape in the institution of marriage- and all its horrible consequences? Is it right to apply a Western lens to Oriental culture, traditions, and values. Is postmodernity the catalyst for this new desire for Persian women to ascertain their identity? There has been evidence of modernity in Iran prior to this Green Revolution: women have entered a myriad of professions: medicine, law, academia... . Is a Western criticism just? Should the West facilitate a revolution in Iran? Will it change the status of women in this religious state? Will it liberate women and men?

Saaed Kamali Dehghan has authored an essay for the Guardian newspaper and he narrates the abuse of female and male university students during the resent election protests. What is the ethos in Iran? This police state does not discriminate against gender when its paramilitray apparatuses quash peaceful protests. Are the imams responsible for the repression and oppression of women? Will the mullahs relinquish their dominance of women? Michael Slackman's recent essay, " Hard-Line Force Extends Grip Over a Splintered Iran", in the New York Times, reports that an expert for the RAND Corporation- an intelligence think tank- affirms that Iran is no longer a theocracy but a military state. Thus, it is not only women that experience repression, but men as well.

Furthermore, it was under Mousavi's reign-under the theocratic lense of Khomeini- that thousands of dissidents were executed during the 1979 Persian Revolution. Why is the Western media not highlighting this salient detail of his authoritarian rule? A recent article, Sunday, July 26, in The New York Times, co-authored by Robert Worth and Nahzila Fahti," Iran's Opposition Calls Crackdown Immoral", neglects to explicate the criminal complicity of Mr Mousavi. Why do these reporters disregard this salient fact from the 1980s? Why is there an implicit support for this venal leader? What liaisons does Moussavi have with current American oil lobby? Is there a new Iranian elite that is propitious to the Obama administration? Will the Moussavi camp engage in a rapprochement~ detente~ with an American corporate sector? Why do they imply that one member of this theocracy, Moussavi, will engage in a modern and original praxis?

Mousavi's wife, Zahra Rahnavard, is a liberal academic, an artist, yet she supports the traditional female Shia attire, the burqa;on the other hand, she is resolute to promote a modern Iranian culture. Nevertheless, she is a woman who is also complicit. Is she cognizant of the tragic turmoil during the 1980s? Did she criticize her husband's alleged crimes during the Iranian Revolution?

How can this offer a new voice to women if Mrs. Rahnavard remains silent? She has recently stated the democracy that is needed for women is a religious one. Yet these freedoms are not included in any official government legislation. This same theocratic-totalitarian government- which her husband, Mr. Mousavi, was a member of in the early 1980s- has oppressed peaceful protesters that solicit answers about the alleged fraudulent election results-the Green Revolution protesters claim that Mr Mousavi was the actual winner during the summer 2009 national vote. How does a woman with political affiliations reconcile this paradoxical dilemma? Does a change in president wholly offer new ethical principles of democracy? Does the Iranian theocracy not permeate every atom of this nation-state? How can real change emerge in this totalitarian state?

Contradictions, hypocrisies and ambiguities are also evident in the USA; in addition, during the most recent week-end, June 20- it succeeded the violent suppression of peaceful protesters in Iran- John McCain has been critical of the Obama Adm's soft critique of Iran's repression and oppression, yet there has been a silent voice by the American media on the USA Adm's support of Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War, as well as supplying Mr Hussein with chemical weapons to kill countless Persians.

Are human rights a valid concern by these Republicans and Democrats alike to wage, or is it a hypocritical praxis? The international community has focused on Iran's potential development of an atomic weapon, and it has has been receiving more exposure than the issue of women's rights. Is the Western corporate media neglecting to report on the rights of Iranian women?

Is the Green Revolution in Iran a new cause "celebre" for the American corporate media? There is nuanced difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad; thus, why is there so much clamour around the fradulent elections? The real power emanates form the Ayatollahs and the spiritual councils; thus, Persian elections are pseudo-tokens of participatory democracy. Why does the Western corporate media support Mousavi? Why have Persian women accepted their new role in this twenty-first theocratic- military state?

A grass-roots revolution is required, one that has no affiliations~past or present~ with imams or ayatollahs and that is germane to the Persian population that is wholly disenfranchised today. This measure solicits the assistance of the intelligentsia to unravel and reveal the CIA's role in its support for Mousavi. A new voice, a fresh secular voice, is required for the marginalised of Iran.

The Global Economic Crisis or Wall Street Plutocrats' Avarice

The corporate media pervasively proffers the US Treasury's subsidy of $700-800 billion that was awarded to myriad American investment and commercial banks: AIG, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Citi Group et al. However, many in the American corporate media neglect to include~analyse, deconstruct~ the $13 trillion dollars that both the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department have channeled, to these plutocrats since September 2008, covertly ( peruse Nomi Prins' artifacts, Bloomerg's web page, PBS interview with Professor William Black).

There was a recent Senate Finance Committee Hearing to investigate the trillions of dollars that the Federal Reserve has granted to these former institutions; nevertheless, on May 5, 2009 Elizabeth Coleman, Inspector General~Federal Reserve, was unable to unequivocally substantiate who received these funds and how much capital was transfered to the former banks (view www.therealnews.com/t/: Federal Reserve: Same Old Sheriff on Wall Street). How is it possible that the most quintessential lending institution in the USA ~ the international standard for reserves and exchanges~ and its officers are unable to substantiate the trillions in capital? Are there issues with arithmetic? Are they unable to hire accountants? Is there a clear intent of obstruction? Could one draw parallels with Mr.Madoff? Mr Stanford? Are these former men scapegoats? Is this corruption endemic? Systemic?

Another interesting detail is the entity of the Federal Reserve. Is it an independent body? Is it quasi-independent? If the United Sates president is responsible for the appointment of its chair~please note, Mr Bernanke has been re-appointed to second term~ clearly there is a inherent relationship with the US Treasury and a development of monetary policy. Why does Mr Bernanke refuse to have Government Accountablity Office (GAO) investigate its ledgers? Many economists have proffered a multitude of figures in regard to the trillions that have been borrowed~ or granted to the banking and financial sectors~ by Goldman Sachs, Bank of America et al.

Furthermore, a paradox does emerge~ Pandora's golden box is ajar ( Be Cautious...)~ as one begins to examine the intimate relationship between the triple A credit agencies that substantiated~authenticated with extreme prejudice~ and approved the credit default swaps, another term for this financial euphemism: "derivatives"; these are the toxic assets that guided Wall Street into the debacle of September 2008 with lingering financial ripples on other Western and Eastern markets. Standard and Poor and Fitch are a few of these Triple A credit agencies that validated these toxic assets; a number of these derivatives are from the Housing Bubble~ Sub-prime Mortgage contracts~ and the predatorial lending practices in lower class neighbourhoods ( Baltimore, Cleveland and Detroit) throughout the United States. A number of economists have commented on this exploitative practice: Mr Jefrey Sachs and Mr.Michael Hudson, as well as Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize economist; in turn, they affirm , especially according to Hudson, that these practices are criminal in nature ( visit the interview with Bill Moyers on PBS).

A new American Administration prevails at the White House ( Canada has not been affected by this Housing Bubble~Should Canadians be vigilant? ) and as of October 2009 effective changes to the banking and financial industry have not been implemented, in fact, Mr Obama has delegated more powers to Mr Bernanke and the Federal Reserve. Why is this quasi-independent institution beyond reproach? Should it be held accountable by the American people? Why does Mr. Bernanke refuse to have the Reserve's logs investigated by the GAO? Many of the banking firms~commercial and investment~ have declared record bonuses to their employees, reported profits in this fiscal year, yet the real victims, middle-lower class American homeowners and the lower class, remain in a state of penury.

Is this the real progressive agenda that Mr Obama campaigned... Is the real change that he articulated during his presidential campaign...? The chasm between the affluent and the destitute exponentially widens and Pandora's golden box will not be sealed, it cannot be esoterically stitched; Ariadne must weave the golden fleece and bellow a consciousness for the indigent; a few progressive voices remain, such as Cornell West, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky, Grace Lee Boggs and Van Jones, who must pervasively be critical of Obama's centre-right agenda. Finally, a real metamorphosis will not emerge without the closure of the prisons~Guantanamo, Bagram and the CIA Black Sites; as well as the trillion dollar war campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The economic sector is intrinsically linked with the "War on Terror" or in Obama's new nomenclature the Overseas Contingency Operation (OCO) , both must be addressed to change the course of the wretched of the earth, as Raj Patel has eloquently avouched in his new artifact Stuffed and Starved.

An important investigation by a reporter of McClatchy News, Greg Gordon, has reported that Goldman Sachs has been implicated ~either directly or indirectly~in 13 trillion dollars of credit-default swaps in the USA, 60 trillion dollars worth of derivatives ~ credit default swaps or toxic assets~ globally. Mr. Gordon also asserts that Goldman Sachs requested 20 billion dollars in protection from AIG in order to validate~secure or guarantee~ these toxic assets. Moreover, Goldman withdrew from the sub-prime mortgage industry and began wagering that the sub-prime mortgage bubble would collapse. A very significant market overseas was located in London where Goldman orchestrated this trillon dollar industry of derivatives.How many members~present and past~ have an association with the American or Canadian administrations? Is it a coinciden

Afghanistan is Obama's Vietnam

The USA President Forty-Four must read history-or is he restricted to American history- and ascertain why the British during the nineteenth century were unable to colonize-imperialize- Afghanistan; the USSR was unable-1979-1989 conflict- to colonize this mountainous and spartan terrain. The Soviets had amassed 500, 000 troops, while the Americans are committing  approximately 50,000 infantry. The US military campaign began in the fall of 2001, eight years and counting, and what exactly have they achieved for the Afghanis?

The British military campaigns were launched in 1838 and 1878 respectively; both military battles were disastrous. During both wars, the British imposed their regime change-puppet leaders-Shuja Shah and Sher Ali. Once again history repeats itself, Bush Junior also imposed a de-facto leader Ahmed Karzai- one important notation: his brother is a narco-trafficker- who has limited sovereignty over the country, and numerous sources ( Patrick Coburn, Andrew Bacevich) assert that he has hegemony only over Kabul.

Another salient footnote: Ahmed Karzai was a former consultant for UNOCAL- and coincidentally another UNOCAL consultant, Zalmay Khalilzad was appointed by the Bush Adm as the special envoy to Afghanistan- and it is interesting to note how the UNOCAL executive, John Maresca, began soliciting a number of House committees for a fruitful and amicable investing environment for the creation of an oil pipeline that traverses via Afghanistan en route from Turkmenistan to Pakistan then India. There must be a myriad of polemic in the American corporate media to reveal the uncanny and putrid coincidence of Haliburton, and Cheney's decision to invade this country and Obama's military objective of transfering the "War on Terror" from Iraq to Afghnaistan.

Did the invading Western powers ever have an understanding of the culture in South-West Asia? Were they ever cognizant of the different tribal forces, religious denominations, languages, values and customs of this volatile region? Did they all believe they could impose their hegemonic presuppositions?

This US military war of aggression will be ingrained in history as Mr. Obama's Vietnam War , as Iraq is Bush Jr's Vietnam War; America is abound with unenlightened leaders, incognizant scholars of history, and these characteristics will enhance the fall of the~ a putrid Pax Americana~ Imperium Americana. An American hegemony will not prevail, war is not the response; history recalls another salient date of 1776 where another empire  superimposed an alien culture on a colony; why would Afghanistan accept, today, a contemptible~kitsch~ culture and its principles of domination?

Bellum Romana Part Two

The War on Terror has a different nomenclature under Obama's presidency. He continues to authorize the drone hellfire missiles on Pakistan: North and South Waziristan. The leader of Pakistan, Zardari, asserts to his population that the existence of the nation-state is in jeopardy from the Taliban forces that reside in these tribal- lawless- areas. Is this his implicit decree to proffer Obama incursions into Waziristan?

There is a plethora of war fronts: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan; in addition, the US military defense budget is -or has approached- $1 Trillion ( Many sources have reported on this statistic: www.the realnews.com, www.democracynow.org, as well as authors: Jospeh Stiglitz, Miriam Pemberton, and Nancy Youssef.) and it is very difficult to ascertain how the Obama Administration will acquire the funds to stimulate the economy.

The salient quandary is Obama's premise of change: Does this include respect for the sovereignty of nation-states? A new level of consciousness? A fresh American conscience? If the US wishes to assert a New World Order it should promote one of an honest broker, a harbinger of peace, an envoy that affirms and engages in humanitarian assistance rather one that tacitly and explicitly entertains the Casus Belli. The international community requires less a USA that flaunts an Imperium Americana, but more a Pax Americana within a community of nation-states that reject the Casus Belli. 

Time is a precious gem... one that Obama must maintain near... but unfortunately the present military actions by his Adm. in Pakistan fragment all the euphonic yawps of change: his campaign , his inaugural speech,  and his press briefings.

North and South Waziristan

Mr Obama, number 44, authorizes Hellfire missile attacks on villages in North and South Waziristan, the drones kill taliban members, but also kill innocent civilians on Friday, January 23.

Is this the new rapprochement to Muslim nations and states that the international community

is to anticipate...?  Is this not a pervasive modus operandi of the Bush-light 43 Administration...?

Does this not indicate that the "War on Terror" is now a mantra of the Obama Adm...?

The Bellum Americana marches on... into new campaigns of asymmetrical warfare. "Mr. Obama

has affirmed a New American Century of peace, change, and detente." ( Is there any irony...) Will these conflicts not become his Vietnams...? One must examine the military spending for 2008, it is approaching 1 trillion US Dollars ( peruse Mr Joseph Stiglitz's artifact). It is clear that the military industrial complex will have just as much "steam" and "wind" ( destruction and blood) with the support of Obama.  Is this the change that he campaigned..

The winds of the east will not be silenced, the voices of the innocent can not be silenced; it is American Foreign Policy that disseminates  the sand dunes  of belligerency.

The 1949 Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Mr Obama must read the 1949 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia pursuant to the most recent attacks of Pakistan: North Wazirstan  by US missiles (Marchak 41, 45) .If universal treaties and human rights represent a void, a nothingness, an absurdity for Mr. Obama, president 44, what kind of change does he wish to articulate...?

Moreover, it only permits him to promulgate the policies of Bush 43. Is this the change that the world must anticipate... Gaza... Darfur... Afghanistan... Iraq... Somalia...Zimbabwe...Congo...   In Mr Obama's recent address did he allude to these nations explicitly... How much time should we proffer him...?  He moved swiftly to bail out the Wall Street Kleptocrats... but, what of all the calamities in the world that need to be considered...?

Yes, change; yes we can...    . This melody collapses on the dung heaps of the moraines .