The Greek Tragedy
Some things not to forget, which the new
Greek leaders have not.
By William Blum
February 24, 2015 "ICH"
- "Anti-Empire
Report" - American
historian D.F. Fleming, writing of the
post-World War II period in his eminent
history of the Cold War, stated that “Greece
was the first of the liberated states to be
openly and forcibly compelled to accept the
political system of the occupying Great
Power. It was Churchill who acted first and
Stalin who followed his example, in Bulgaria
and then in Rumania, though with less
bloodshed.”
The British intervened in
Greece while World War II was still raging.
His Majesty’s Army waged war against ELAS,
the left-wing guerrillas who had played a
major role in forcing the Nazi occupiers to
flee. Shortly after the war ended, the
United States joined the Brits in this great
anti-communist crusade, intervening in what
was now a civil war, taking the side of the
neo-fascists against the Greek left. The
neo-fascists won and instituted a highly
brutal regime, for which the CIA created a
suitably repressive internal security agency
(KYP in Greek).
In 1964, the liberal
George Papandreou came to power, but in
April 1967 a military coup took place, just
before elections which appeared certain to
bring Papandreou back as prime minister. The
coup had been a joint effort of the Royal
Court, the Greek military, the KYP, the CIA,
and the American military stationed in
Greece, and was followed immediately by the
traditional martial law, censorship,
arrests, beatings, and killings, the victims
totaling some 8,000 in the first month. This
was accompanied by the equally traditional
declaration that this was all being done to
save the nation from a “communist takeover”.
Torture, inflicted in the most gruesome of
ways, often with equipment supplied by the
United States, became routine.
George Papandreou was not
any kind of radical. He was a liberal
anti-communist type. But his son Andreas,
the heir-apparent, while only a little to
the left of his father, had not disguised
his wish to take Greece out of the Cold War,
and had questioned remaining in NATO, or at
least as a satellite of the United States.
Andreas Papandreou was
arrested at the time of the coup and held in
prison for eight months. Shortly after his
release, he and his wife Margaret visited
the American ambassador, Phillips Talbot, in
Athens. Papandreou later related the
following:
I asked Talbot whether
America could have intervened the night
of the coup, to prevent the death of
democracy in Greece. He denied that they
could have done anything about it. Then
Margaret asked a critical question: What
if the coup had been a Communist or a
Leftist coup? Talbot answered without
hesitation. Then, of course, they would
have intervened, and they would have
crushed the coup.
Another charming chapter
in US-Greek relations occurred in 2001, when
Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street Goliath
Lowlife, secretly helped Greece keep
billions of dollars of debt off their
balance sheet through the use of complex
financial instruments like credit default
swaps. This allowed Greece to meet the
baseline requirements to enter the Eurozone
in the first place. But it also helped
create a debt bubble that would later
explode and bring about the current economic
crisis that’s drowning the entire continent.
Goldman Sachs, however, using its insider
knowledge of its Greek client, protected
itself from this debt bubble by betting
against Greek bonds, expecting that they
would eventually fail.
Will the United States,
Germany, the rest of the European Union, the
European Central Bank, and the International
Monetary Fund – collectively constituting
the International Mafia – allow the new
Greek leaders of the Syriza party to dictate
the conditions of Greece’s rescue and
salvation? The answer at the moment is a
decided “No”. The fact that Syriza leaders,
for some time, have made no secret of their
affinity for Russia is reason enough to seal
their fate. They should have known how the
Cold War works.
I believe Syriza is
sincere, and I’m rooting for them, but they
may have overestimated their own strength,
while forgetting how the Mafia came to
occupy its position; it didn’t derive from a
lot of compromise with left-wing upstarts.
Greece may have no choice, eventually, but
to default on its debts and leave the
Eurozone. The hunger and unemployment of the
Greek people may leave them no alternative.
The Twilight Zone of the
US State Department
“You are traveling
through another dimension, a dimension not
only of sight and sound but of mind. A
journey into a wondrous land whose
boundaries are that of imagination. Your
next stop … the Twilight Zone.”
(American Television series, 1959-1965)
State Department Daily
Press Briefing, February 13, 2015.
Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki,
questioned by Matthew Lee of The Associated
Press.
Lee:
President Maduro [of Venezuela] last night
went on the air and said that they had
arrested multiple people who were allegedly
behind a coup that was backed by the United
States. What is your response?
Psaki:
These latest accusations, like all previous
such accusations, are ludicrous. As a matter
of longstanding policy, the United States
does not support political transitions by
non-constitutional means. Political
transitions must be democratic,
constitutional, peaceful, and legal. We have
seen many times that the Venezuelan
Government tries to distract from its own
actions by blaming the United States or
other members of the international community
for events inside Venezuela. These efforts
reflect a lack of seriousness on the part of
the Venezuelan Government to deal with the
grave situation it faces.
Lee:
Sorry. The US has – whoa, whoa, whoa – the
US has a longstanding practice of not
promoting – What did you say? How
longstanding is that? I would – in
particular in South and Latin America, that
is not a longstanding practice.
Psaki:
Well, my point here, Matt, without getting
into history –
Lee:
Not in this case.
Psaki:
– is that we do not support, we have no
involvement with, and these are ludicrous
accusations.
Lee:
In this specific case.
Psaki:
Correct.
Lee:
But if you go back not that long ago, during
your lifetime, even – (laughter)
Psaki:
The last 21 years. (Laughter.)
Lee:
Well done. Touché. But I mean, does
“longstanding” mean 10 years in this case? I
mean, what is –
Psaki:
Matt, my intention was to speak to the
specific reports.
Lee:
I understand, but you said it’s a
longstanding US practice, and I’m not so
sure – it depends on what your definition of
“longstanding” is.
Psaki:
We will – okay.
Lee:
Recently in Kyiv, whatever we say about
Ukraine, whatever, the change of government
at the beginning of last year was
unconstitutional, and you supported it. The
constitution was –
Psaki:
That is also ludicrous, I would say.
Lee:
– not observed.
Psaki:
That is not accurate, nor is it with the
history of the facts that happened at the
time.
Lee:
The history of the facts. How was it
constitutional?
Psaki:
Well, I don’t think I need to go through the
history here, but since you gave me the
opportunity –- as you know, the former
leader of Ukraine left of his own accord.
………………..
Leaving the Twilight Zone
… The former Ukrainian leader ran for his
life from those who had staged the coup,
including a mob of vicious US-supported
neo-Nazis.
If you know how to contact
Ms. Psaki, tell her to have a look at my
list of more than 50 governments the United
States has attempted to overthrow since the
end of the Second World War. None of the
attempts were democratic, constitutional,
peaceful, or legal; well, a few were
non-violent.
The ideology of the
American media is that it believes that it
doesn’t have any ideology
So NBC’s evening news
anchor, Brian Williams, has been caught
telling untruths about various events in
recent years. What could be worse for a
reporter? How about not knowing what’s going
on in the world? In your own country? At
your own employer? As a case in point I give
you Williams’ rival, Scott Pelley, evening
news anchor at CBS.
In August 2002, Iraqi
Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz told
American newscaster Dan Rather on CBS: “We
do not possess any nuclear or biological or
chemical weapons.”
In December, Aziz stated
to Ted Koppel on ABC: “The fact is that we
don’t have weapons of mass destruction. We
don’t have chemical, biological, or nuclear
weaponry.”
Iraqi leader Saddam
Hussein himself told CBS’s Rather in
February 2003: “These missiles have been
destroyed. There are no missiles that are
contrary to the prescription of the United
Nations [as to range] in Iraq. They are no
longer there.”
Moreover, Gen. Hussein
Kamel, former head of Iraq’s secret weapons
program, and a son-in-law of Saddam Hussein,
told the UN in 1995 that Iraq had destroyed
its banned missiles and chemical and
biological weapons soon after the Persian
Gulf War of 1991.
There are yet other
examples of Iraqi officials telling the
world, before the 2003 American invasion,
that the WMD were non-existent.
Enter Scott Pelley. In
January 2008, as a CBS reporter, Pelley
interviewed FBI agent George Piro, who had
interviewed Saddam Hussein before he was
executed:
PELLEY:
And what did he tell you about how his
weapons of mass destruction had been
destroyed?
PIRO:
He told me that most of the WMD had been
destroyed by the U.N. inspectors in the
’90s, and those that hadn’t been destroyed
by the inspectors were unilaterally
destroyed by Iraq.
PELLEY:
He had ordered them destroyed?
PIRO:
Yes.
PELLEY:
So why keep the secret? Why put your nation
at risk? Why put your own life at risk to
maintain this charade?
For a journalist there
might actually be something as bad as not
knowing what’s going on in his area of news
coverage, even on his own station. After
Brian Williams’ fall from grace, his former
boss at NBC, Bob Wright, defended Williams
by pointing to his favorable coverage of the
military, saying: “He has been the strongest
supporter of the military of any of the news
players. He never comes back with negative
stories, he wouldn’t question if we’re
spending too much.”
I think it’s safe to say
that members of the American mainstream
media are not embarrassed by such a
“compliment”.
In his acceptance speech
for the 2005 Nobel Prize for Literature,
Harold Pinter made the following
observation:
Everyone knows what
happened in the Soviet Union and throughout
Eastern Europe during the post-war period:
the systematic brutality, the widespread
atrocities, the ruthless suppression of
independent thought. All this has been fully
documented and verified.
But my contention here is
that the US crimes in the same period have
only been superficially recorded, let alone
documented, let alone acknowledged, let
alone recognized as crimes at all.
It never happened. Nothing
ever happened. Even while it was happening
it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It
was of no interest. The crimes of the United
States have been systematic, constant,
vicious, remorseless, but very few people
have actually talked about them. You have to
hand it to America. It has exercised a quite
clinical manipulation of power worldwide
while masquerading as a force for universal
good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly
successful act of hypnosis.
Cuba made simple
“The trade embargo can be
fully lifted only through legislation –
unless Cuba forms a democracy, in which case
the president can lift it.”
Aha! So that’s the
problem, according to a Washington Post
columnist – Cuba is not a democracy! That
would explain why the United States does not
maintain an embargo against Saudi Arabia,
Honduras, Guatemala, Egypt and other
distinguished pillars of freedom. The
mainstream media routinely refer to Cuba as
a dictatorship. Why is it not uncommon even
for people on the left to do the same? I
think that many of the latter do so in the
belief that to say otherwise runs the risk
of not being taken seriously, largely a
vestige of the Cold War when Communists all
over the world were ridiculed for blindly
following Moscow’s party line. But what does
Cuba do or lack that makes it a
dictatorship?
No “free press”? Apart
from the question of how free Western media
is, if that’s to be the standard, what would
happen if Cuba announced that from now on
anyone in the country could own any kind of
media? How long would it be before CIA money
– secret and unlimited CIA money financing
all kinds of fronts in Cuba – would own or
control almost all the media worth owning or
controlling?
Is it “free elections”
that Cuba lacks? They regularly have
elections at municipal, regional and
national levels. (They do not have direct
election of the president, but neither do
Germany or the United Kingdom and many other
countries). Money plays virtually no role in
these elections; neither does party
politics, including the Communist Party,
since candidates run as individuals. Again,
what is the standard by which Cuban
elections are to be judged? Is it that they
don’t have the Koch Brothers to pour in a
billion dollars? Most Americans, if they
gave it any thought, might find it difficult
to even imagine what a free and democratic
election, without great concentrations of
corporate money, would look like, or how it
would operate. Would Ralph Nader finally be
able to get on all 50 state ballots, take
part in national television debates, and be
able to match the two monopoly parties in
media advertising? If that were the case, I
think he’d probably win; which is why it’s
not the case.
Or perhaps what Cuba lacks
is our marvelous “electoral college” system,
where the presidential candidate with the
most votes is not necessarily the winner. If
we really think this system is a good
example of democracy why don’t we use it for
local and state elections as well?
Is Cuba not a democracy
because it arrests dissidents? Many
thousands of anti-war and other protesters
have been arrested in the United States in
recent years, as in every period in American
history. During the Occupy Movement two
years ago more than 7,000 people were
arrested, many beaten by police and
mistreated while in custody.
And remember: The United
States is to the Cuban government like al
Qaeda is to Washington, only much more
powerful and much closer; virtually without
exception, Cuban dissidents have been
financed by and aided in other ways by the
United States.
Would Washington ignore a
group of Americans receiving funds from al
Qaeda and engaging in repeated meetings with
known members of that organization? In
recent years the United States has arrested
a great many people in the US and abroad
solely on the basis of alleged ties to al
Qaeda, with a lot less evidence to go by
than Cuba has had with its dissidents’ ties
to the United States. Virtually all of
Cuba’s “political prisoners” are such
dissidents. While others may call Cuba’s
security policies dictatorship, I call it
self-defense.
The Ministry of Propaganda
has a new Commissar
Last month Andrew Lack
became chief executive of the Broadcasting
Board of Governors, which oversees US
government-supported international news
media such as Voice of America, Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East
Broadcasting Networks and Radio Free Asia.
In a New York Times interview, Mr.
Lack was moved to allow the following to
escape his mouth: “We are facing a number of
challenges from entities like Russia
Today which is out there pushing a
point of view, the Islamic State in the
Middle East and groups like Boko Haram.”
So … this former president
of NBC News conflates Russia
Today (RT) with the two most despicable
groups of “human beings” on the planet. Do
mainstream media executives sometimes wonder
why so many of their audience has drifted to
alternative media, like, for example, RT?
Those of you who have not
yet discovered RT, I suggest you go to
RT.com to see whether it’s available in
your city. And there are no commercials.
It should be noted that
the Times interviewer, Ron Nixon,
expressed no surprise at Lack’s remark.
Notes