[Editor’s note: Remember that it was WaPo that led the charge in naming Fort Russ News as fake news‘. We took it as a compliment. Who stands for Empire, War, and rule by the Bankers? – J.Flores]
The propaganda coming from the US media is worsening as the campaign that sells a humanitarian military intervention against Venezuela from abroad is sharpening. From which arises the question: who are behind this media “consensus”?
Much has been said about the use of “humanitarian crises” in order to promote military interventions, especially those related to the destructive consequences of such operations. The cases of Somalia, the extinct Yugoslavia and Libya are the most representative of the last decades because they are nations that plunged into unprecedented chaos along with the installation of paraeconomies and human trafficking and the business of infinite war.
Little is written about how a “humanitarian” type of program is put together, in which the NGO’s financed or directed by Soros circles and the US-AID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the media propaganda financed by the promoters of interventions, are key agents of military operations.
Thus, the sale of stories as marketing products around the current Venezuelan situation becomes more and more verbose in its modes and deployment. American media such as The New York Times (NYT) and The Washington Post (WaPo) are the usual propagandists of this type of story, and do not skimp on resources to do their work effectively even when they promote false stories (fake news) in all possible ways.
Editorials in favor of destruction and intervention
This is not about hiding the harsh consequences of the crisis (imposed) on Venezuela, but about unraveling what is told about it and what is hidden in the corporate media. The fact that the NYT publishes an extensive photo report on a supposed famine that takes the lives of Venezuelan children prematurely should cause suspicion not only because of the medium that divulges the “news” but because of the way in which the information is treated.
One of the most common techniques of pro-intervention propaganda is the atomization of the information collected to show it as a generalizing context.
The NYT uses the testimony of a family as a portrait of a country finished by hunger to disfigure reality: although Venezuela is going through difficult times in terms of exacerbated induced inflation and programmed shortages, the majority of the population is able to obtain food through effective food subsidy plans, especially through the Local Supply and Production Committees (CLAP), which to date benefits more than 6 million families.
Undoubtedly, there have been serious cases of families that have become impoverished by the economic situation in the country. Among them the case presented by the NYT, although it is used in a sensational way to sell to the global readership that almost all children in the country die of hunger under the responsibility entirely of the Bolivarian Government, without nuances of any kind. The different factors that converge in the present national crossroads are not mentioned.
According to ”New York” media, “the government has used food as a way to stay in power”: a reckless assertion if we take into account that private entrepreneurs and traders have hidden food or left it to decompose and raised prices of those in a systematic way, referenced a currency rate completely out of step with the Venezuelan monetary reality. These are proven facts, not opinions like the NYT cited.
It is verified, then, that through images that impact the sensitivity of the news receiver and stories that are shown as totalizing pictures of a broad and complex reality, the causes of the Venezuelan situation are also denatured. The concealment of the origins of the crisis has an immediate repercussion, according to the NYT, on Chavismo’s responsibility for all the consequences that these media catalog as a “humanitarian crisis”.
Few journalists and political analysts say that the causes of what is happening today in Venezuela have to do both with the sabotage within the local economy and the local currency and with the financial blockade imposed by the White House and the Department of the Treasury, whose effects are transferred to the various sectors of national economic life because the Venezuelan State is dependent on petrodollars.
A similar scenario was used against Iran , a country currently attacked by the Trump Administration from several fronts and that serves as a mirror of the Venezuelan reality.
However, the NYT is not the only means that launches its information batteries against Venezuela: the WaPo is even more belligerent in its editorial position.
An opinion note signed by Jackson Diehl , one of the most popular voices of the WaPo, demonstrates his support for humanitarian intervention on Venezuelan soil.
In fact, he cites the delirious article by Ricardo Hausmann, an agent of Harvard University and former minister Carlos Andrés Pérez, to argue “how the extremes of the crisis in Venezuela are breaking political taboos of old generations.”
It also highlights the figure of Luis Almagro, secretary general of the Organization of American States (OAS), who according to WaPo promotes the idea of an oil embargo by the US on Venezuela as a mechanism of pressure for regime change.
The Lima Group, under the guidelines of Washington, comes to this issue, as according Diehl would support this not so hypothetical scenario with actions since the embargo has not been declared but has been met de facto since last year, as a deepening of the international blockade on the economic and financial structure of the country.
The end of the WaPo article affirms that we live in times in the region where military invasions are urgent because, supposedly, there is an express request from Venezuela regarding this option, an alternative already looked at by the president of the United States.
Nothing is further from reality, especially if we take into account that both the NYT’s fake news and the covertly editorial texts of the WaPo sell an idea that is rejected by, at least, 76% of Venezuelans.
The business of war has its spokesmen
The two American media cited here are part of a corporate structure linked to the high finance of Wall Street and the brokerage of multimillionaire personalities, also connected to the CIA and the so-called military-industrial complex.
This last network has had the NYT and the WaPo , among other means on a global scale, to promote the wars necessary for the financial ledgers of the main contractors of weapons in the USA.
The business of war, then, takes a special highlight in terms of the narratives of collapse and intervention, if we take into account that the US media have been taken by power groups with strategic plans to initiate conflicts for political, economic, financial, geopolitical and geoeconomic.
Well documented by the journalist Carl Bernstein is the fact that the CIA has close ties to the NYT since the 1950s, a matter that also affirms the former American spy Steve Kangas.
The former director of that media, Arthur Hays Sulzberger, was a close friend of Allen Dulles, then director of the CIA and designer of covert operations that ended in coups in other parts of the world. Sulzberger himself is today one of the big shareholders of The New York Times Company as well as other financial hedge funds, captains of Wall Street, such as Vanguard Group and Blackrock Inc. NYT publishers recognize the imperial power of the US , that resides in its military capacity and the financial structure of the dollar, and they approve it without shame.
Similarly, the WaPo is owned by a multimillionaire with close connections to the military-industrial complex: this is Jeffrey Bezos, owner of the Amazon digital commerce portal.
Bezos bought the WaPO in August 2013 for about 250 million dollars. In 2012 he completed a commercial operation with the CIA, a cooperation that details a strong investment in a Canadian quantum computing company . In March 2013, Amazon signed a 600 million dollar agreement to provide computer services for the CIA and other US government intelligence and security agencies.
The intimate collaboration between information agencies and military services in the US is a story that is growing by leaps and bounds. It has been noted how this cooperation is preferred, above all, with the WaPo as the main propagandist of the industrial-military complex, above the NYT, which until recently rejoiced in that title.
In tune with the sensationalist narratives of these two media, faithful to the propaganda principles of repeating the lie until it becomes truth, the media use of the NYT and the WaPo against Venezuela is a sign of a large-scale marketing operation.
The stories of “humanitarian crises” that include the promotion of a military intervention by the US and its “allies” over the country are also to increase the profits of the western industrial-military complex led by corporations such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon.
A commercial operation, because as they raise the tone and allow a scenario of military intervention, these companies can increase their influence on the defense budget and the demand for weapons that allows them to increase their stock market prices.
That same network related to the corporate military world joins the submitted bill of humanitarian assistance already approved by the lower house of the US Congress, taken by the transnationals through lobbies and financing, in which the Pentagon is asked to enlist for a humanitarian intervention on Venezuela. There is no dissonant or misplaced note in the corporate score.
The spokesmen of the humanitarian invasions do not play in the journalistic field, but they are part of the business of war. With Venezuela, they try to gather those incessantly invested in by these corporations that have power in the US, for the last five decades.