Bolivian President “Resigned” at Gunpoint Last Week, After Taking Back Control from the Rothschild-Controlled IMF & World Bank in 2017.

Back in 2017, the alt media was glad to report that Bolivia managed to kick out the Rothschild’s banks out of the country and reclaim its financial independence, by not responding to financial pressure from the U.S government or Rothschild owned banking entities.

Before Evo Morales assumed the office of president, Bolivia was suffering from the effects of IMF/ World Bank-imposed austerity and privatization that exploited its people and resources. It was also South America’s poorest nation.

Though the Bolivian people, through strong showings of popular resistance over a period of years, were able to stop some of the worst privatization efforts – particularly the privatization of the nation’s water supply, many of the shackles imposed by these Rothschild-controlled institutions remained.

Since 2006, a year after Morales came to power, social spending on health, education, and poverty programs has increased by over 45 percent.

During a visit to Tarija in Southern Bolivia, Morales said:

“Before, in order to obtain credit from the IMF, we were forced to give up a part of our country, but we have liberated ourselves economically and politically and we are no longer dependent on other countries or institutions.”

Bolivia’s President Evo Morales has been highlighting his government’s independence from international money lending organizations and their detrimental impact the nation.

“A day like today in 1944 ended Bretton Woods Economic Conference (USA), in which the IMF and WB were established,” Morales tweeted.

“These organizations dictated the economic fate of Bolivia and the world. Today we can say that we have total independence of them.”

This was back in 2017. Unfortunately, it was not meant to last.

Bolivia Is the Latest Successful US-Backed Coup in Latin America

According to MintPressNews,

“Bolivian President Evo Morales “resigned” at gunpoint Sunday, after army generals publicly demanded his resignation, despite convincingly winning re-election just three weeks ago.

The preceding 21 days were filled with fractious demonstrations and counter-protests from Morales’ supporters and opponents. On October 20, Morales had secured enough votes to win the election outright in the first round without the need for a run-off against his closest challenger, Carlos Mesa.

However, Mesa cried fraud, citing supposed irregularities in the vote-counting procedure, claiming Morales did not receive the requisite vote share to ensure his victory. The Organization of American States (OAS) and the U.S. government repeated this claim, although neither group provided evidence of fraud.

Morales invited the OAS to audit the election as he was confident of its veracity. Indeed, a report by the Washington-based Center for Economic Policy Research found that the vote totals were “consistent” with those announced, finding no irregularities whatsoever. Despite this, the local U.S.-backed opposition went on the attack.

Right-Wing Rampage

On Saturday, veteran political scientists Noam Chomsky and Vijay Prashad warned thata coup is brewing against the elected government” of Bolivia, expressing their concern at the “fascistic” violence percolating throughout the country.

In Santa Cruz, a stronghold of the wealthy white elite who oppose Morales, the office of the electoral authority was burned down.

Meanwhile, in Vinto, opposition groups kidnapped local mayor Patricia Arce, cut her hair off and painted her body red, publicly dragging her through the streets and abusing her, forcing her to commit to leaving office.

Victor Borda, President of Bolivia’s Chamber of Deputies, was also forced to resign after coup forces attacked his house and kidnapped his brother.

As soon as Morales stepped down, the police, who had refused to serve his government, ordered his arrest and vandals ransacked his house.

Meanwhile, the conservative opposition joyously burned the flag of Bolivia’s indigenous people (a majority of the country’s population), in the clear hopes that the coup would mark a return to rule by the white elite who had been in power since the time of the Conquistadors.

The United States Applauds the Coup

The Trump administration released an official communication Monday, not just endorsing the coup, but all but stating “we did it.”

“The resignation yesterday of Bolivian President Evo Morales is a significant moment for democracy in the Western Hemisphere,” it read, claiming the events constituted the “preservation of democracy.” It also sent a clear threat that more regime change operations were to come, and they already knew who the targets were:

“These events send a strong signal to the illegitimate regimes in Venezuela and Nicaragua that democracy and the will of the people will always prevail. We are now one step closer to a completely democratic, prosperous, and free Western Hemisphere.”

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo also welcomed the events, claiming that Bolivia could now be “ensured free and fair elections.” Michael McFaul, Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and former U.S. Ambassador to Russia, was even more pleased.

“Morales has fled. Excellent!” he exclaimed on Twitter.

The U.S. government has long opposed Morales and his Movement for Socialism party’s agenda of nationalizing Bolivia’s resources to help its people.

However, it inadvertently helped him get elected in the first place. Shortly before the 2006 election, the U.S. embassy in La Paz put out a public statement saying it could, under no circumstances, accept a Morales presidency. This enormous election meddling backfired, however, as his polling numbers surged as a result.

While the Trump administration intimates that this will not be the last, the Bolivia case is merely the latest in a long line of U.S.-backed coups in the region. Historian and former State Department employee William Blum calculated that the U.S. has overthrown over 50 governments since 1945, many of them in the region it considers its “backyard.”

For example, in 2009, the U.S. supported a coup against the leftist government of Manuel Zelaya, blocking any regional or international response. Hillary Clinton later boasted that, in her role as Secretary of State, she had “rendered the question of Zelaya moot.”

Since 2009 the country has been ruled by a right-wing military dictatorship that brutalizes its population, leading to a mass exodus of refugees northward, one of the principal (but unspoken) drivers of the so-called refugee caravan crisis on the U.S./Mexico border.

In 2002, the U.S. sponsored and took part in a briefly successful coup against Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, only for it to be reversed by a massive display of collective solidarity from Venezuela’s people who refused to accept the situation and inspired loyal units to retake the presidential palace and rescue Chavez.

Haiti was not so lucky. President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, leader of a grassroots people’s movement, was overthrown in U.S.-backed coups in 1991 and 2004, leaving the nation with a corrupt puppet government that turned the country into the huge, impoverished sweatshop for Western corporations it is today.

This continual interference gave rise to the wry comment in Latin America that the safest place in the world is the U.S. because it is the only nation without an American embassy.

In 13 years in office, the Movement for Socialism has revolutionized Bolivia, nationalizing the country’s key resources and putting the proceeds towards social programs tackling the population’s most pressing concerns.

Poverty was reduced by 42%, and extreme poverty by 60%, with unemployment halving. School enrollment and the provision of electricity has greatly increased, and the government has built over 150,000 social houses and has instituted a free state pension for all those over 60 years old.

However, Morales courted controversy when he lost a national referendum that proposed to end term limits. Despite the result, the Supreme Court ruled that he could stand anyway. He had also drawn criticism from environmentalists for continuing Bolivia’s extractive economic model.

Corporate Media Obscuring Reality

There is a perfect word in the English language for when army generals appear on television demanding the resignation of an elected head of state while their allies detain and torture government officials. Yet corporate media are steadfastly refusing to frame events as a coup, instead uniformly describing Morales as “resigning.” Many did not even mention the actions of the army generals.

CBS News, for example, claimed that Morales was “resigning” due to “election fraud and protests.” The New York Times asserted he “stepped down” amid “weeks of mass protests by an infuriated population that accused him of undermining democracy.” It expressed relief that his “grip on power” had finally been weakened, giving space to one commenter to claim that this marked “the end of tyranny.”

Thus, the media presented the military overthrow of a democratically-elected leader as the welcome demise of a “full-blown dictatorship” and the “restoration of democracy,” rather than just the opposite, highlighting their remarkable skill with language.

The CIA Has Interfered With Over 81 Foreign Elections in the Past Century (I Guess It’s 82 Now).

Denunciations of the Coup

On the other hand, there has been a forthright rejection of the events from much of the Western left. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), for example, who recently expressed her pride in endorsing Bernie Sanders, who, she said, promises to fight Western imperialism, stated via Twitter:

Sanders himself was “very concerned” about the coup against the leader who he met at the Vatican and who had praised him deeply. UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn was more forthright, claiming he was “appalled” by what happened:

Noam Chomsky and Vijay Prashad described what they saw as another U.S.-backed Latin American coup.

“The coup is driven by the Bolivian oligarchy, who are angered by the fourth election loss by their parties to the Movement for Socialism. The oligarchy is fully supported by the United States government, which has long been eager to remove Morales and his movement from power.

“For over a decade, the US embassy’s Center of Operations in La Paz has articulated the fact that it has two plans – Plan A, the coup; Plan B, assassination of Morales. This is a serious breach of the UN Charter and of all international obligations. We stand against the coup, and with the Bolivian people.”

The Future

Morales has been offered asylum by the Mexican government. It is far from clear whether the Bolivian people will accept the new events, but what is clear is that the Trump administration is pursuing a much more aggressive line than Obama with regards to regime change. Those who follow Latin America will hope this is not a return to the days of the dark days of dirty wars and coups d’etat.

Source: MintpressNews.com / References: MintpressNews.com; HumansAreFree.com; HumansAreFree.com

College Professor Pens Scathing and Brilliant ‘Open Letter’ To Teen Climate Activist Greta Thunberg.

In one of the most blistering and scathing rebukes ever recorded in modern history, a Univerity Professor absolutely annihilates teen climate bully Greta Thunberg.

In one of the most blistering and scathing rebukes ever recorded in modern history, a Univerity Professor absolutely annihilates teen climate bully Greta Thunberg.

As I read this piece, I had to stop myself from standing up and cheering. It was that good.

Lines like this: “If civilization is left in the hands of your ecofascist supporters we will be living in grass huts, drinking animal feces infested water, and shrinking in fear from polar bears instead of killing them for food when they attack us” are just the tip of the iceberg (pun intended) in this absolute rebuke of everything Greta Thunberg stands for, preaches, and lectures on behalf of her handlers.

Professor Jason D. Hill points out that Greta’s generation cannot eat meat without “crying,” or be away from their technology for more than an hour without falling into a deep depression. And speaking of that, creating all of those technology devices and gadgets that her generation is so dependent on is a leading cause of “carbon-spewing.”

Related:[VIDEO] Creepy 6-Story Mural of Climate Activist Greta Thunberg Goes Up in San Fransisco

Here is a hard truth to ponder, Greta: if the great producers of this world whom you excoriate were to withdraw their productivity, wealth and talents—in short—their minds from the world today, your generation would simply perish. Why? Because as children you have done nothing as yet, with your lives besides being born. This is what we expect of children until such time as they can be producers by learning from their elders. You are understandably social and ecological ballast. You are not yet cognitively advanced to replicate the structures of survival of which you are the beneficiaries.

Children are important installments on the future. We have invested in you. It is you and your smug generation which think they have nothing to learn from the older ones who are failing themselves. Whom do you expect to employ the majority of you if you have neither the job credentials or life competency skills to navigate the world? The future unemployable-skipping- school-on-Friday obstreperous children?

The truth, as one anonymous blogger aptly put it, is that your generation is unable to work up to forty hours per week without being chronically depressed and anxious. Its members cannot even decide if they want to be a boy or a girl, or both, or neither, or a “they.” They cannot eat meat without crying. I might add that your generation needs “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” as pre-conditions for learning in school. Its members have a pathological need to be coddled and protected from the challenging realities of life. Your generation is the biggest demander and consumer of carbon spewing technological gadgets and devices. An hour without any of them and too many of you succumb to paralyzing lethargy. Your generation is the least curious and most insular set of individuals one has ever encountered. Your hubris extends so far that you think you have nothing to learn from your elders. [FrontPageMag]

Written by Missy Crane

“MUST SEE” Onderzoek complot dood Prins Friso en aanslag Koninginnedag 2009.

Geloof het of niet, na het zien van deze 2 documentaires weet u wel beter hoe onze Koningshuis in elkaar steekt. Het is een valse bende die zich bedient van het volk in elke vorm die je je maar kan bedenken, ook wel sektarische parasieten genoemd. U bloed en zij leven daar van.

Neem even de tijd, echt de moeite waard om te kijken en zeker massaal te delen met vrienden familie en groepen.

SOURCE: changeeuropenow.com