It was only a matter of time until someone living and working outside of Thinktankistan noticed that “instability” in Latin America was a “potential threat” to El Norte:
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP )– U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel said Monday that unrest in several South American nations poses a potential threat to the U.S.
“There are some disturbing signs in South America that we need to pay attention to,” said Hagel, a Republican member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Hagel made the comment during a news conference call following a weekend trip with committee chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., to the U.S. Southern Command in Miami.
“There are … countries in South America that are under great distress,” he said. “You’ve presidents displaced or thrown out for various reasons. Any unrest in the Southern Hemisphere presents potential problems for all of us.”
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a critic of the presence of U.S. troops in Colombia, has alarmed U.S. officials with his close ties to Cuban leader Fidel Castro, his plans to buy 100,000 Russian assault rifles and his constant criticism of U.S. foreign policy.
Hegel says all this stuff about the “displacing” of presidents as if it’s a bad thing. There are times I admire Hegel, but like the good and thoughtful minion of Rockefeller World Empire (Murray Rothbard’s term) that he is, he spend way too much time contemplating and being concerned about the welfare of citizens in other nations and the “stability” of their governments.
Exactly which instability is he talking about? The unrest in Bolivia that has unseated two presidents in the last 20 months? The rather chronic instability in Ecuador during the last eight years? The bribery scandal engulfing Brazil’s ruling party? Argentina’s economic crisis? The war in Colobia? Hugo Chavez?
Unless one yearns for the days of Yanqui-backed caudillos bringing “stability” for banana growers and canal operators, what exactly is the “threat” to the United States? Why is it wrong for people to take to the streets and demand the resignation of their president or the ouster of their governments? (And what would it take for that to happen in El Norte?) Unless, of course, “democracy” is defined entirely by the meaningless, scheduled sacramental elections we insist upon having in this country and foisting upon others, and not anything real or substantial.
Which, of course, is what the Rockefeller World Empire is all about — the triumph of the pointless plebiscite granting the illusion of “self-government” without conveying any substance.
There is, as an observer in Yanquistan, an entertainment aspect I think has gone unused by a smart media entrepeneur. Find all of the ousted former chief executives of Ecuador (and possibly Bolivia), rent them a great big house in Panama, and film a reality teevee show, Los Ex-Presidentes. Whoever is the last ex-presidente in the house gets to be president of something. I dunno, some island somewhere, or maybe Brazil would “donate” the Peter & Paul Rocks or something.
TV Globo needs to get on this.
11:44 am on July 11, 2005
