Archive for the Reporters without Borders Category

“There will always be an Emilio” • Cuban State Security agent posed as a counterrevolutionary journalist to reveal how Cuban dissidents are manufactured by foreign paymasters [Granma Internacional]

Posted in Corporate Media Critique, Cuba, Czech Republic / Czechoslovakia, Fidel Castro, Germany, Havana, Media smear campaign, National Endowment for Democracy, Netherlands, Poland, Reporters without Borders, Sweden, US imperialism, USA, Western nations' human rights distortions on March 6, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Until shortly before this interview he was considered the spokesperson for the damas de blanco (Ladies in White) and one of the so-called independent journalists. His revelations expose the prevalence of the subversive U.S. policy toward Cuba

Havana.  March 1, 2011

Deisy Francis Mexidor

"GREETINGS to the audience of Radio República. Carlos Serpa Maceira, director of the Union of Free Journalists of Cuba, talking to you from Havana…"

"Right now, I can invent some news and
with no confirmation whatsoever,
without verifying anything, it will
be broadcast."

An independent reporter monitored
by USIS officials.

Carlos Manuel Serpa gained access
to high ranking officials within the
U.S. Interests Section, including
Michael Parmly.

When he was told that his identity would
be revealed, Serpa considered it a great
gift for his daughter Tita.

The surprise was a big one: Carlos Serpa Maceira, the "independent journalist," whose reporting for the anti-Cuba media during 2009 was the most prolific is, simply, State Security agent Emilio.

Agencies linked to the Ministry of the Interior decided to disclose his identity as irrefutable evidence of the work of counterrevolutionary mini-groups, thus exposing its principal mentors and the sick proposition of successive U.S. administrations to defeat the Cuban Revolution.  They direct, finance, support and promote a dissident movement without legitimacy on the island.

Where were you born?

I’m from Cárdenas in Matanzas province, from the land of the student leader José Antonio Echeverría. I was born on October 10, the same day on which the the cry of ‘Independence or death’ was raised at the Demajagua sugar mill by the father of the nation (Carlos Manuel de Céspedes), which is why my name is Carlos Manuel.

But you have a special affinity with the Isle of Youth?

I lived there and my daughter, now aged 18, was born there. The Isle of Youth is part of my history and is there in my heart.

In what context did Emilio arise?

That’s my pseudonym within State Security.  It was the name of my uncle, who raised me.  I thought that assuming his name was the best way of honoring his memory and what he always defended.  He was a combatant in Playa Girón [Bay of Pigs].

Emilio, the agent, began to fulfill missions in 2001.

Who were you linked to at that time?

With the so-called Pinero pro Human Rights Committee, whose president was Hubert Rodríguez Tudela, now in the United States; then I moved into the Isle of Pines Human Rights Foundation and Fomento Territorial, another counterrevolutionary mini-group based there, and for which I became a sort of spokesman.  I began to do my first reports for Radio Martí at that stage.

Later, I was linked to the Cuban Independent Journalists and Writers Union, a supposed press agency with a similar profile to the mini-groups mentioned, directed by Fara Armenteros, likewise now resident in the USA.

How did that contact come about?

I was working as a state inspector.  Some counterrevolutionary elements approached me, a situation that I immediately communicated to State Security.  From that point, it was decided that I should start on this mission.

How did you arrive in Havana?

Given the complexity of the tasks that I was undertaking, I was instructed to transfer to the capital of the country.

That’s how I had greater contact with the counterrevolutionary world.

From your experience, what is your opinion of this so-called opposition or internal dissidence?

The counterrevolution has sold its soul to the devil.  They are mercenaries, they are not even patriots nor do they have any convictions.  They are all about dollars, campaigning and getting money out of it.  I’m going to give you an example: Jorge Luis García Pérez (Antúnez), who has become tremendously famous abroad.

Supposedly, he says that he’s going to organize a counterrevolutionary march anywhere in Cuba and they automatically send him money for that.

From here they report that it was a demonstration of 150 to 200 people – which is untrue because, when they actually do something, it’s just him and another couple of provocateurs – and what does Antúnez do with that money.  Lives the good life.

Then there are the cases of Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello, who receives money by the cartload – and everyone knows who Martha Beatriz is – of Elizardo Sánchez, Juan Carlos González Leyva – this latter is the secretary of the self-styled Human Rights Rapporteurs Council in Cuba.

González Leyva has taken on this mercenaries business as a means of self-enrichment; for example, he’s gotten some of the women he’s had relations with out of the country via the USIS (U.S. Interests Section) Refugee Program.  He’s also gotten money out of Miami counterrevolutionary organizations with the story of charging prisoners’ phone cards and then he dips his hand in and steals it.

It is obvious that none of these so-called dissidents have any ethics, the only thing they’re interested in is money.  Moreover, a large part of those linked to these groups have even asked for the blockade of our country to be intensified.

Once they even proposed providing me with a blog and told me to call it El Guayacán cubano.  They clearly wanted it to be something similar to that of the counterrevolutionary Yoani Sánchez to earn money and live well.

And how was that supposed to function?

They explained , via the blog, they would ask followers for donations and emphasized, ‘We’re going to fix you up with the El Guayacán cubano blog and you ask your supporters for money so that you can live.’

The man who really handles that blog is Enrique Blanco, a counterrevolutionary located in Puerto Rico, from Operación Liborio, a project to finance the so-called opposition from abroad.

He has posted information on the blog as if he was me; simply, if I couldn’t attend a particular activity, in this case almost always related to the damas de blanco, he would communicate directly with them and write a report.

Now that the issue of information has been mentioned, is it difficult to organize an anti-Cuba media campaign?

No, it isn’t difficult. In my case all I had to do was communicate with Radio Martí and they’d immediately call me back. I could invent a piece of news right now and without any confirmation or verification, they’d put it out on air.

A short while back I invented an atmosphere around the trial of a counterrevolutionary.  I said that when I left my home and passed by the headquarters of City of Havana Peoples’ Provincial Court, I saw a large deployment of State Security agents and the presence of foreign journalists there as well, although they didn’t see me…

I "dressed that up" a bit with elements like the Security agents recognized me and bundled me into a car and, under heavy threats, took me to a police unit close by.

When I called Radio Martí the person who took the call clarified to me, ‘When you say that they threatened you, you have to explain what threats they made.’  I replied OK and not to worry and that’s how I put together my news report.

Radio Martí doesn’t confirm anything.  The thing is to denigrate Cuba for any reason. After I transmitted that they suggested that I put it in the news report as well.

In the anti-Cuba media campaigns the script always comes from abroad.  A lot of it is based on lies, on writing stories of false arrests, of incidents when there aren’t any, but are manufactured.

Which organizations generally lend themselves to expanding those campaigns abroad?

Without any doubt the Inter-American Press Society (SIP) and Reporters without Borders (RSF). Those two organizations are ready 24 hours a day, seven days a week to foment any media campaign against our country.

Continue reading


Belarus Elections and Lukashenko’s Victory; Corporate media promotes lies about fraud, covers up putschist riots as opposition flops []

Posted in Andrew Lukashenko, Belarus, Black propaganda, Bourgeois parliamentary democracy, Capitalist media double standard, CIA, Corporate Media Critique, Corrupt judge, Fascism, Georgia, Germany, Media cover-up, Media smear campaign, National Endowment for Democracy, Nazism, Obama, Reporters without Borders, State Department, US imperialism, USA, World War II, Yugoslavia - former FRY on January 3, 2011 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Also see the much-more thoroughly-documented article “No “Regime Change” in Belarus. 2010 Election: a crushing defeat for Western policy” [ /] –

“As the US official in charge of financing ‘democracy promotion’ in Eastern Europe has admitted, the foreign-funded opposition in Belarus is a “surrealistic reality show”, which had no realistic hope of winning power through the ballot box…”

December 24, 2010

by Gearóid Ó Colmáin

On the 19th of December Alexander Lukashenko secured a fourth term as president of Belarus with an overwhelming majority of the votes. Decried as ‘Europe’s last dictator’ by the international corporate media, the last 16 years of Lukashenko’s presidency have seen rising salaries, full employment and rising living standards. Lukashenko’s popularity in Belarus is beyond question.

After the Belarus election, TNS Global Market Research, the world’s second largest research company, whose headquarters are in London, published its statistics on the Belarusian exit polls.

Dr.Nicolai Churilov, a social scientist from TNS told the ONT TV channel in Belarus:

“We have interviewed more than 11 thousand people, and now we are ready to provide the final data. At first, Alexander Lukashenko – 74,2%, the second – and Nyaklyaeu Sannikov (5,8%), the third – Romanchuk (3, 1%). More significantly behind are Tereshchenko, Rymashevsky, Statkevich, Kostusev and Mikhalevich and Uss “- according to Dr. Churilov 5.6% of the population voted against all candidates.” [1]

TNS Global Research has clients all over the world including the United States and Europe and it is highly unlikely that they would risk their reputation by publishing inaccurate information in order to prop up the democratic image of a country shunned by the ‘international community’.

The Belarusian elections were observed by representatives from the Commonwealth of Independent States( CIS )as well as the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The CIS delegates gave the election a clean bill of health stating that there was no evidence of rigging or fraudulent vote-counting.

This positive assessment of the elections was also echoed by some OSCE observers as well as many independent observers from around the world.

The chief adviser of the Association of Turkish businessmen and manufacturers, former vice-president of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly and former Minister of Trade and Industry in Turkey Tahir Kessy told Belarusian reporters: “I hope that the OSCE recognizes (as well as I do now) that these elections fully comply with its standards…what I saw on the sites – a free vote and a fair election. Elections in Belarus are just fine.” [2]

This view was shared by an independent German observer Frank Musser who said:

“early voting in Belarus was held at a high level in an open and friendly atmosphere. I visited 22 polling stations, as a former police chief I can say that they were all thoroughly checked”[3]

Other observers who approved of the electoral conduct were Italian member of parliament Andrea Rigoni and OSCE/ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human rights)observer David Byrne Heysel who said “Among those polling stations we visited, many are in rural areas. We liked the fact that no matter where the voting booths were, and despite the snowfall, there was free access with cleared motorways, including in the villages. There was a very friendly atmosphere at the sites themselves with many welcoming and smiling people” [4]

Former Lithuanian Prime minister Casimir Prunskiene told Belarusian reporters :

“It’s important for people that the economy of Belarus is stable right now, despite the economic crisis. Now they have not only preserved the achievements of Belarus, but also magnified them. This encourages people to make the appropriate choice for the preservation of stability” [5]

Indeed, by Sunday evening everything seemed to be going in Lukashenko’s favour. He had won another landslide victory. For once, the CIS and the OSCE seemed to agree that the elections were fair by international standards.

The head of the OSCE mission in Belarus, German ambassador Geert Ahrens told Belarusian media that significant progress had been made but that a positive assessment of the elections would depend on the OSCE judgement of vote counting procedure. [6]

Ahrens’s statements were rather ambiguous. On the one hand, progress had been made while on the other, the OSCE was not yet prepared to approve the result.

However, some irregularities were registered by the Electoral Commission during the voting. One of the presidential candidates tried to bribe the chairman of the electoral commission with 50,000 US dollars. Intimidation and harassment of women by opposition voters was also noted. [7]

Matters came to a head, however, when minibuses of rioters arrived on the streets of Minsk to contest the election results.

~ Riots by ‘human rights’ protesters and ‘civil society’ activists ~

Immediately after the elections on Sunday evening December 19th around three thousand protestors stormed the October Square in the Belarusian capital, waving the flags of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

These flags are particularly offensive to most people in Belarus as they were the flags used by the Nazi collaborators during the Second World War. Belarus suffered more atrocities committed by the Nazis than any other country during World War II.

When law enforcement officers stopped a minibus of protesters, thugs attacked the police leaving one officer with serious head injuries. At least three police officers were hospitalised. Police found gas cylinders, metal fittings and stun grenades. [8]

Led by some of the defeated opposition candidates, hooligans attacked government buildings, breaking windows and doors. What the Western press would present as a ‘heavy-handed crackdown’ by the Belarusian police on ‘peaceful’ protestors, was in fact an attack on Belarusian democracy by a gang of violent putschists, mobilised by opposition candidates.

Dr.Edmund Lengfelder is a German specialist in radiation medicine from the Otto Hug Strahleninstitut in Munich, who has been working in Belarus since the Chernobyl disaster in 1985. Lengfelder was among the OSCE delegation observing the elections. This is what he had to say about the ‘peaceful’ protestors lauded by the international media.

“Young people armed with rods and shovels were trying to break into an administrative building. Any reasonable person would understand that it was just an attempt to start a row and challenge the election results.”

Lengfelder strongly defended the conduct of the elections stating that he had visited 25 polling stations and had not noticed any violations. “I noticed nothing that runs counter to the law. And I am guided only by criteria and recommendations from the ODIHR/OSCE mission while monitoring the election process,” he said. [9]

Instead of showing the video footage of the opposition thugs attacking the police and the parliament buildings, the international press focused on the attempts by the police to restrain them. But proof of the protesters violent behaviour was shown on the Russian television station Russia Today.

Many journalists were injured in the riots, including Victor Tolochko, a photojournalist for the Belarusian First National Channel.

The rioting on Sunday evening [December 19th 2010], led to the arrest of over 600 people, who were detained according to article 293 of the Belarusian Criminal Code. Vladimir Nyaklyaeu, one of the defeated presidential candidates suffered severe head injuries after leading the rioters to the parliamentary buildings.

Article 35 of the Belarusian constitution states:

‘The freedom to hold assemblies, rallies, street marches, demonstrations and pickets that do not disturb law and order or violate the rights of other citizens of the Republic of Belarus, shall be guaranteed by the State. The procedure for conducting the above events shall be determined by the law.’ [10]

The rules and regulations surrounding demonstrations and rallies are no different in Belarus to other European countries. Demonstrations and rallies must be sanctioned by the authorities according to standard legal procedures. The OSCE, in backing unsanctioned rallies are effectively supporting criminal activities. Such behaviour makes a mockery of their pretentions to being the paragons of ‘international standards’ of civil society and democracy.

~ The OSCE press release and ‘international standards’ ~

Shortly after the riots, the office of the OSCE published a press release in which they claimed that the election results were flawed and failed to live up to ‘international standards’. Paragraph two refers to the arrest of hundreds of ‘civil society’ and ‘human rights’ activists as well as the detention of opposition presidential candidates. There is no condemnation in the press release of the violence against the police and parliament buildings. [11]

The OSCE press release mentions voting ‘irregularities’ but does not specify what exactly those irregularities were. In a private telephone conversation with this author, OSCE spokesman Hans Eschenbaecher, was asked if he was aware of the allegations of bribing made by the electoral commission against one of the presidential candidates. He replied “ we are not prepared to comment on allegations made by the Belarusian government.”

Mr Eschenbaecher was also asked if he was aware of the statements made on the riots by OSCE observer Dr. Edmund Lengfelder. “ I was not aware of these statements but I will check with my colleagues” he said. [12]

According to CIS Executive Sectretary Sergei Lebedev, the majority of OSCE observers present during the Belarusian election said they were free and democratic.[13]

After the 2001 election the head of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Gerard Stoudmann told reporters that the elections had been ‘free and open in compliance with universal democratic institutions’. [14]

Mr Stoudmann’s comments were ignored in the official OSCE denunciation of the 2001 Belarusian election results, just as Dr. Lengfelder’s comments were ignored on the 20th of December 2010.

In 2006, the OSCE once again condemned the election of Lukashenko as unfair and unfree, yet they could not possibly have known whether or not it was fair or free as they had refused to observe it! The violence that ensued after the 2006 elections bears an uncanny resemblance to the riotous behaviour seen on the 19th December 2010.

After the 2006 election, the defeated opposition took to the streets in an effort to storm the parliament. One opposition candidates even called for the violent overthrow of the government and the death of President Lukashenko. The OSCE blamed the police for arresting these hooligans and the mainstream media did their utmost to blame the Belarusian authorities for their ‘crackdown’ of the ‘democratic’ opposition. [15]

For the international corporate press agencies, unpopular opposition movements funded by the National Endowment for Democracy in the United States and the European Union are perfectly entitled to throw bottles and stones while calling for the death of a democratically elected leader. This is the European Union’s interpretation of ‘human rights’ in countries that refuse to obey economic directives from Brussels and Washington.

The riots that followed President Lukashenko’s landslide victory on Sunday 19th December followed a similar pattern. Ten candidates ran for the election. The campaigns of each candidate were financed by the state according to the Belarusian constitution, each candidate receiving equal funds from the state to fincance [sic] his electoral campaign.

One of the opposition websites European Radio for Belarus laments the fact Belarusian candidates cannot be bought by rich businessmen as in Poland, Lithuania and Russia. The article says much about the opposition’s interpretation of ‘democracy’[16]

Notwithstanding the equal funding of all the presidential candidates and the generous air time they received throughout the Belarusian media they all lost miserably. This is because none of the presidential candidates had anything substantial to offer. Instead of debating concrete policies, the opposition candidates spent most of their time insulting the president. None of them were able to convince the Belarusian people that free market capitalism is the greatest of all possible worlds.

The OSCE press release also deplores the absence of ‘independent’ media in Belarus. Yet of all the CIS countries Belarus has the highest access to the internet. The government only blocks sex trafficking and extreme pornography sites as well as racist websites such as Stormfront. There is nothing unusual about such controls.

~ Access to international media is free and open to all citizens. ~

In 2005, there were 776 newspapers in Belarus. 555 of them were independent. Independent media outweighs state broadcasting in all media domains including TV and radio.

Millions of US tax-payer dollars go to funding anti-Lukashenko propaganda in Belarus, through the National Endowment for Democracy, a CIA front organisation that funds pro-American fifth columns all around the world.

Many of the anti-Lukashenko publications have moved outside Belarus so as to avoid paying libel fees. Most opposition media papers have to resort to personal insults and defamation in order to demonise Lukashenko.

Reporters Without Borders, a US backed media watchdog who are routinely hostile to governments Washington dislikes, have listed some of the opposition newspapers available in Belarus: Narodnaya Volya, Delovaya Gazeta, Zhoda, Regionalnaya Gazeta, Nasha Niva, Vetbskiy Kurier, Brestskiy Kruier, Inter-Press, Gazeta Slonimskaya, Borisovski Novosti, Dlya Vas, Volnay Hlybokaye et Myastsoviy Chas and Solidarnost. [17]

When one adds to these the countless anti-Lukashenko websites and radio stations and their US and EU financed journalists, it is simply absurd to claim that the Belarusian people are not capable of making an informed choice due to the hegemony of state propaganda. There is more independent media in Belarus than any other country in Europe. If dissident media in the European Union or the United States received similar amounts of funding, there would be a veritable revolution in the West!

The problem with the ‘independent’ media in Belarus is that it is not ‘independent’. The Belasrusian people know who’s paying the piper. The problem for the West, therefore, is the intellectual superiority of the Belarusian people. The Belarusians are simply not taking the Western bait!

The violent riots on Sunday 19th provided the perfect pretext for the OSCE to condemn the election results. With a little help from the international media, they were able to manipulate world public opinion by implying that the actions of the Belarusian government after the elections somehow infringed on the oppositionists ‘human rights’. It was a brilliantly co-ordinated intelligence operation. It was, in fact, a repeat of the attempted coup of 2006, the so-called ‘denim revolution’, one is a grand series of colour revolutions that swept through Eastern Europe and Central Asia, planned and paid for by the Central Intelligence Agency and its Western partners.

~ ‘Human rights’ in Belarus and the OSCE ~

Mandated with observing elections, human rights issues, arms control and collective security, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe was set up during the Cold War to co-ordinate policies among the countries of the Northern Hemisphere. Since the election of Lukashenko in Belarus in 1994, the OSCE has taken a key interest in human rights and democracy in ‘Europe’s last dictatorship’.

After the landslide victory of Alexander Lukashenko in 2001, the OSCE denounced the election as ‘neither free nor fair’ in spite of the fact that they had refused to observe it! In a speech to the European parliament one month after the disputed elections French politician Paul-Marie Coûteaux said:

“At the legislative elections which took place in Belarus on October 15, a delegation of seven MEPs visited Minsk from 13 to 17 to observe “the correct conduct of the poll”. The observation noted the progress of democracy in this country because in all polling stations visited, the ballot appeared regular (voting booths, the presence of an opposition member in each office, election posters in entrances, etc …). Alas! The United States, who dream of overthrowing the regime of Lukashenko, deemed favourable to Russian interests, had announced 15 days ago that these elections were not democratic, in order to devise a plan that would authorize the installation of NATO bases to a few hundred kilometres from Moscow.

That which MEPs had seen was of no importance, their delegation being incorporated into an OSCE mission headed by German Ambassador, Mr. Wieck, a former intelligence chief of the Federal Republic between 1985 and 1989, who had decided to follow in the footsteps of the virtuous American denunciations … In a press conference, Mr. Wieck had a difficult time containing the anger of various international observers who had all noted the progress of democracy in Belarus, which received the backing of the author of these lines, showing that the OSCE report had been prepared in advance. Nevertheless, the Western press only retained the condemnation of the OSCE. Note that this is the same organization that once ruled as ‘regular’ elections in Georgia where the vast majority of opposition leaders were jailed PRIOR to those elections! But this time the OSCE had decided to support Mr. Chevarnadtze ‘…”[18]

The OSCE officials sent to observe the elections in Belarus are nominated by Western governments. The president of the Parliament of the OSCE is currently US Congressman Alcee Hastings. In 1989 Mr. Hastings, a US federal court judge, was convicted of corruption and perjury in the United States. In the House of Representatives’ Hastings was accused of acts of corruption that ‘strike at the heart of our democracy’[19]

Mr Hastings was one of congressmen who voted against the re-count of the 2000 US presidential elections. He did not have any concern about the obvious irregularities and voting fraud of the Republican campaign.

When the Obama administration was attempting to garner support for the health reform bill earlier in 2010 Mr. Hastings made the following comment: “When the deal goes down, all this talk about rules, we make them up as we go along.” So, this is the man who is overseeing democratic standards, rules and regulations in Belarus! From this man’s record, we can learn all we need to know about the OSCE’s ‘international democratic standards’, they simply make them up as they go along!

On the possibility that the OSCE might be allowed to monitor the US elections the American neo-consevative [sic] writer Daniel Pipes comments:

“This is a significant step toward the erosion of American sovereignty, not so much operationally (what harm can some election monitors do?) but conceptually (placing the OSCE and perhaps later other institutions over domestic safeguards). That a Republican administration is acquiescing to such a step makes it doubly worrisome.”

Pipes goes on to point out that it is simply absurd that a convicted criminal like Alcee Hastings should be Co-Chairman of the OSCE. Pipes is outraged by the prospect of such corrupt officials monitoring American elections. He quotes the president of the American Policy Centre Tom De Weese, who writes:

“The outrage just got more outrageous. Not only has the State Department invited a team of unaccountable, foreign bureaucrats to meddle in our free elections, but these meddlers are headed by one of the most corrupt individuals in the U.S. Congress. While they’re at it, why doesn’t the State Department invite O.J. Simpson to head up the FBI crime lab?” [20]

The problem for Pipes is that such people could become observers of elections in America. But, of course, it is perfectly acceptable for convicted criminals to be put in charge of observing ‘democracy’ in Belarus. It is difficult to imagine the pent-up frustration of Belarusian officials who are forced to listen to lectures by criminals on ‘international standards’ of democracy.

As mentioned above, the current head of the human rights section of the OSCE, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OIDHR) is the distinguished German diplomat Geert Ahrens.

Ahrens previously served as German ambassador in Yugoslavia during the 1990s.

His mission there was to head a working group on the problem of minorities and ethnic conflict. Whether he knew it or not , his own Government was one of the chief agitators of ethnic conflict in the country when the Bundesnachtrichtensdienst (German Federal Intelligence agency) joined forces with the CIA to arm, train and finance Islamic narco-terrorists with links to Osama Bin Laden in the form of the Kosovo Liberation Army. [21]

The purpose of the covert German backing of narco-terrorists was to finish the job Hitler had begun in 1941, namely the formation of a client-regimes in Croatia, Greater Albania and Bosnia. During the Second World War, the Nazis armed and trained the SS Skanderbeg divisions in Kosovo and Albania and the SS Handschar divisions in Bosnia and Croatia. These Islamo-fascists were used by the Third Reich as proxy forces to fight the communists and Yugoslavian partisans. Similar methods were used during the NATO destruction of Yugoslavia. Islamic terrorists were useful to the Nazis then and are useful to NATO now. Clichés about history are painfully true.

~ German Nazis, Belarusian fascists and the CIA ~

The connections between German intelligence and the CIA go back a long time. Reinhold Gehlen, one of Hitler’s top intelligence officers, was selected by the CIA to head the post war German intelligence apparatus where he served until 1968. There are many examples of Nazis who served in the post-war West German state and intelligence apparatus agitating for ‘democracy’, ‘freedom’ and ‘human rights’ in countries where they had committed unspeakable crimes against humanity.

The ‘human rights’ and ‘civil society’ activists are mainly composed of right-wing Russian-hating nationalists who intimidate the Belarusian people with the odious flag of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the banner used by Belarusian Nazi collaborators during World War II.

The United States, through its CIA front organisation, the National Endowment for Democracy, allocates million of dollars every year to fund capitalist propaganda in Belarus. There are countless US funded websites in Belarus such as the anti-Lukashenko website Chapter 97, a ‘human rights’ website which supports the war in Iraq, while Radio Liberty beams pro-US propaganda into the country every day. [22]

Many people in Belarus recall the pro-nationalist broadcasts of Radio Liberty during the Cold War. Many of Radio Liberty’s broadcasts extolled Ukrainian and Belarussian war criminals who had collaborated with the Nazi occupation of Belarus; such as Dmitri Kasmovic, leader of the Belorusian Liberation Movement, who was responsible for the murder of thousands of communists and Jews during Operation Barbarossa. Kasmovic worked for US intelligence during the Cold War and had close links to Republican party circles in the United States.

It is a great credit to President Lukashenko and the Belarusian authorities that they have treated these people with such tolerance and respect. Were these ‘civic activists’ to find themselves on the wrong side of governments the EU and the USA support such as Colombia, Rwanda, or Kosovo, they would face death squads.

The CIA’s nefarious methodologies have not changed and most people in Belarus detest their anti-human ideology of greed and war. The Belarusian people fought heroically against the fascist onslaught financed by those same international financial institutions who now pretend to speak for ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’. [23]

Belarus has been an independent democratic state for over 16 years. What the Western intelligence agencies do not understand is that this is a country which lost millions of lives due to the savage rapacity of international capitalism in the form of the Third Reich.

The Belarusian working class and the veterans of the Great Patriotic War vote for Lukashenko because he has refused to succumb to the hegemony of financial capitalism under the authority of the European Union. They vote for Lukashenko because salaries are rising every year, pensions are secure, there is free universal healthcare, full employment and free education. These are the concrete freedoms millions of Soviet citizens died for. They did not give in to the fascists in the past and they will not give in now.

Edited by Zuo Shou 左手

Article link, including footnotes:

The “Evil Guys List”? “Free Journalism” in the Service of US Foreign Policy; the role of Reporters without Borders by F. William Engdahl []

Posted in Anti-China media bias, National Endowment for Democracy, Reporters without Borders, US Agency for International Development, USA 21st Century Cold War with tags , , , on May 5, 2010 by Zuo Shou / 左手

Remember when Robert Menard, Paris-based Secretary-General of Reporters without Borders, personally disrupted the Olympic Torch lighting ceremony in Greece for the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics?   His organization stands exposed, and has for some time,  as a front for US government covert foreign policy operations.

Excerpt:  “An organization calling itself Reporters Without Borders (RWB; French: Reporters sans frontières, or RSF) has just named Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, China’s President Hu Jintao, Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kazakhstan’s Nursultan Nazarbayev and Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko to their list of Forty Worst Predators of Press Freedom for 2010.  Most significant about their list of ‘bad guys’ is the geopolitical relation of those leaders and those countries to the current ‘enemies list’ of the US State Department.  That is no accident, as becomes clear when we look more closely at who funds RWB…

NED hiding behind RWB

 …The most interesting question is not the deeds of Hu Jintao or Putin or Ahmadinejad in the last year in relation to their national press, but rather who is judging these leaders.  We might well ask, “Who judges the judges?”  The answer is, Washington…

…If we go to the RWB website to find who stands behind these self-anointed judges of world press freedom, we find nothing.  Not even their board of directors are named, let alone their financial backers.  Their annual published Income and Expenditure statements give no clue who stands behind them financially…

 …In their official financial statements and income accounts published in September 2009, they state:  “The organisation’s finances in 2008 were marked by the end of the campaign (begun in 2001) over the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games which significantly affected income and expenditure.”  That means RWB spent eight years and undisclosed amounts of money campaigning against the Government of China in the run-up to the Beijing 2008 Olympics.  For what purpose?  Notably, the RWB names China’s President Hu Jintao as this year’s ‘predator’ for his actions in cracking down on unrest in Tibet in March 2010 [sic] and Xinjiang in July 2009, both of which were the covert work of a US-financed NGO called National Endowment for Democracy (NED).   Hmmm.

 After years of trying to hide it, Robert Menard, Paris-based Secretary-General of Reporters Sans Frontieres or RWB, confessed that the RWB budget was primarily funded by “US organizations strictly linked to US foreign policy.”   Those US based organizations which support RWB include the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the US Congress’ National Endowment for Democracy (NED)…As one researcher found after months of trying to get a reply from NED about their funding of Reporters Without Borders, which included a flat denial from RSF executive director Lucie Morillon, the NED revealed that Reporters Without Borders received grants over at least three years from the International Republican Institute.  The IRI is one of four subsidiaries of NED.

The NED…was created by the US Congress during the Reagan administration on the initiative of then-CIA Director Bill Casey to replace the CIA’s civil society covert action programs, which had been exposed by the Church committee in the mid-1970s.  As Allen Weinstein, the man who drafted the legislation creating the NED admitted years later, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”  Perhaps an organization sitting as judge of world press freedom ought itself to practice a little more openness and transparency about where its backing originates. Otherwise we might think they have something to hide.

Full article here